Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":6054,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Capernaum","title_en":"Capernaum","content_ro":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","summary_en":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13165,"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":15612,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Healing Heal","title_en":"Healing Heal","content_ro":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","summary_en":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24362,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Mark","title_en":"Gospel of Mark","content_ro":"<h3>MARK, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 60 and 68.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorDateProvenance\">Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, although this is by no means certain). At one point Papias states, “The Elder used to say this also: Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that [Peter] remembered concerning the things both said and done by the Lord.” (This quotation was preserved by the fourth-century writer Eusebius of Caesarea in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.39.15.) One need not doubt the basic reliability of this statement. Mark—almost surely to be identified with the John Mark of Acts 12:12 (see also 1 Pt 5:13)—was a disciple of Peter, and the second Gospel owes its existence, at least in part, to the apostle’s reminiscences. It does not follow, however, that one has adequately characterized Mark’s work if that is all one says. For instance, Papias’s qualification, “though not in order,” indicates that Mark did not intend to write a chronological biography. Furthermore, Papias goes on to comment (according to one interpretation of his ambiguous words) that Mark (or Peter?) adapted the material to the teaching situation and that therefore Mark is absolved from any (implied) charges of inaccuracy. It appears that from the earliest times Christians appealed to the purposes and circumstances of Mark’s writing in order to account for difficulties in harmonizing the material found in the various Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Other statements from Christian writers in the second, third, and fourth centuries seem dependent on Papias’s testimony, but some additional data they provide may possess independent value. For example, a fairly early document (date uncertain) known as the Anti-Marcionite Prologue asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel somewhere in Italy after Peter’s death (in the mid-60s), and this testimony is considered reliable by many scholars. Still, the possibility that Mark composed his work before Peter’s martyrdom cannot be ruled out completely.<\/p>\n<p>Papias says nothing specific about <em>when<\/em> the Gospel was written. A small minority of scholars date Mark shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Another minority suggest a date in the 40s or 50s on the basis of a papyrus fragment discovered in Qumran called 7Q5. (According to José O’Callaghan, the fragment, which has been dated about <span>AD<\/span> 50–68, should be identified as Mark 6:52-53.) This fragment contains only 20 letters on one side, making the Markan reconstruction very uncertain. Few scholars are convinced that the text is Mark; some think it is part of 1 Enoch or Zechariah. An impressive majority of scholars date Mark in the 60s, with conservatives usually preferring the early years of the decade. Why this preference? If the theory of Markan priority is accepted, then clearly Mark was written before Luke; and since Luke is normally dated by conservatives about <span>AD<\/span> 62, Mark can be no later than <span>AD<\/span> 60 or 61. This line of argument, though strong, is not decisive. In the first place, Luke cannot be dated with complete certainty. Second, the view that Matthew and Luke used Mark (the working assumption of most scholars) is only a hypothesis, and one that is vigorously opposed by some writers. Third, a tradition going back to the second century (see above) asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel <em>after<\/em> Peter’s death, no earlier than <span>AD<\/span> 64. Fourth, one persuasive view regarding the occasion of this Gospel assumes that the Neronian persecution (<span>AD<\/span> 64) had begun. (According to a different view of the occasion, Mark was written after the beginning of the Jewish revolt in <span>AD<\/span> 66.) Therefore, while a date in the early 60s remains possible, it does not require committal.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the authorship of the second Gospel, there seems to be no compelling reason to deny Papias’s report that Mark (no doubt the John Mark of Acts 12:12) took down Peter’s reminiscences and that these became the basis of his work. Some scholars argue that the Gospel contains geographical inaccuracies (e.g., we have no evidence of a region called Dalmanutha, Mk 8:10) and that a native of Jerusalem such as Mark would have been more reliable in his information. However, the topographical problems in Mark, though real, need not be interpreted as inaccuracies (present ignorance of a place named Dalmanutha is hardly conclusive proof that it did not exist). Furthermore, in other respects (e.g., 14:54, 66) the Gospel reveals an impressive knowledge of local details. Many writers also point out bits of information that support a Petrine background, such as the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (1:30-31). In short, the internal evidence, while falling short of proof, does not at all undermine the tradition preserved by Papias. A generation ago, the trustworthiness of Papias’s testimony was almost universally accepted. This situation has changed somewhat, but even those scholars who adopt a skeptical attitude toward this tradition concede that it <em>may<\/em> be true.<\/p>\n<p>As attention turns to the provenance of the Gospel, the task becomes more difficult. Tradition going back to the second century asserts what may be already implied by Papias—namely, that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome. Although some scholars have suggested other possibilities, such as Galilee and Antioch, these have not proved satisfactory. Mark did spend some time in Rome, and some characteristics in the Gospel (such as Latinisms in the Greek and the explanation of Jewish customs, as in 7:3-4), while proving nothing, are certainly consonant with a Roman origin. Furthermore, one persuasive view of the occasion that gave rise to the Gospel assumes a background of persecution in Rome.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Distinctives\">Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>A number of characteristics of Mark set it apart from the other Gospels. For example, a word usually translated “immediately” occurs more than 40 times in Mark and only a dozen times in the rest of the NT. While this feature could be interpreted as a simple “mannerism,” consonant with Mark’s unpretentious, colloquial style, it certainly adds to the rapid flow of his narrative, which, dwelling more on Jesus’ activity than on his discourses (in contrast to Matthew and Luke), shifts from scene to scene with hardly a pause. Since the Gospel is also quite brief (Luke is nearly twice as long), one may wonder whether the author intended for it to be read at a sitting; even if read aloud, this would take only about one and a half hours. At any rate, there can be little doubt that the work conveys a sense of urgency.<\/p>\n<p>Other characteristics, however, prove more significant. Someone unfamiliar with the story of Jesus who happened to read Mark for the first time would no doubt be taken aback by its rather abrupt beginning. After a brief clause that stands as a sort of title (1:1), Mark moves on to describe in brief the ministry of John the Baptist. Then he introduces Jesus as coming from Nazareth without telling us anything whatever of his earlier life. Furthermore, over one-third of the book (including the so-called Passion narrative) is devoted to Jesus’ last week. These and other factors lend to the work a note of mystery, accentuated by the fact that at various points Mark calls attention to the fear or amazement gripping those who came in contact with Jesus (2:12; 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6; and several other passages, especially the strange words of 10:32). In addition, if one assumes that the Gospel originally ended with 16:8, Mark wished to leave his readers with the same sense of awe that the disciples experienced at Jesus’ resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>But how does one account for this fear and amazement? Mark’s clear answer is that Jesus, though truly a man, is also divine. While Mark’s Gospel exhibits the humanity of Jesus Christ (1:41; 3:5; 8:12; 10:14), his chief emphasis is on the Lord’s deity. Indeed, Mark introduces his book by referring to Jesus as “the Son of God” (a phrase omitted in some manuscripts, however), a position that is recognized both by the demons (3:11; 5:7) and by God himself (9:7). What may well be the true climax of the Gospel occurs at 15:39, where Mark writes that a Gentile, a Roman centurion, upon hearing Jesus’ death cry, exclaimed, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The author organized his Gospel according to a simple plan. The first eight chapters summarize the nature of Christ’s public ministry by alternating stories that show his growing popularity with stories that stress the disapproval of the Jewish leaders. This first half of the book, while indicating some of the tensions created by Jesus’ coming, gives the basic impression of success and general optimism. A significant shift then strikes the reader toward the end of chapter 8, particularly beginning with verse 31. At Caesarea Philippi, Peter has just confessed that Jesus is the Messiah, and now for the first time Jesus reveals that as Messiah he must die. The disciples become perplexed and discouraged and their pessimism mounts as this thought is brought home to them repeatedly (9:9, 31; 10:32-34; 14:17-25). In the end they desert their master (14:50).<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly, this pessimistic note is anticipated in the earlier part of the Gospel at three points: 3:6 (Jesus’ enemies plot his death); 6:6 (faithlessness in Nazareth); and 8:21 (lack of understanding in the disciples). Some scholars suggest that Mark used these three verses to indicate the first three divisions of his book. In addition, other scholars note that two healings of blind men (8:22-26; 10:46-52) seem to provide the opening and the conclusion of a section that emphasizes the spiritual blindness of the disciples. One more structural clue is 14:1, which clearly marks out the final section of the Gospel.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OccasionPurposeTheology\">Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>A few scholars think that Mark may have been combating a heretical sect that stressed the miracles of Jesus and viewed him purely as a divine wonder-worker. Although this view has not gained acceptance as originally formulated, a number of writers do see the Gospel as a theological corrective. Ralph Martin, who links Mark very closely with Paul, suggests that the evangelist is opposing some heretical groups who have distorted Paul’s message by placing exclusive stress on Christ as a <em>heavenly<\/em> figure (cf. the views that Paul himself opposes in Colossians). Mark responds to these aberrations by emphasizing, in Martin’s words, “the paradox of Jesus’ earthly life in which suffering and vindication form a two-beat rhythm.” Even if one decides that this reconstruction, too, is rather speculative, one may nevertheless retain certain elements in it as valid.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars, such as H. Kee, place emphasis on the apocalyptic background of Mark. Kee and others tie this element to the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66, but commitment to this particular historical connection is unnecessary to appreciate the great significance of Mark 13 (Jesus’ apocalyptic discourse) for those original readers of the Gospel who may have been undergoing persecution.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most satisfactory reconstruction links this Gospel to the Neronian persecution in the mid-60s. Mark, for example, is the only Gospel that records that Jesus, after being driven to the wilderness, found himself in the company of wild animals (1:13). This detail, according to William Lane, “was filled with special significance for those called to enter the arena where they stood helpless in the presence of wild beasts.” This interpretation, while not without difficulties, has the advantage of accounting for most of the available data. First, it is compatible with the strong tradition that assigns the origin of Mark’s work to Rome. Second, Mark speaks distinctly to those suffering persecution by introducing them quickly to John’s imprisonment and several other details. Third, related to this is Mark’s emphasis on discipleship. Christians facing persecution must have been tempted to relax the standards (4:17-19). Fourth, given this general situation, one can hardly doubt the significance of our Lord’s apocalyptic message in chapter 13, intended to encourage the disciples in the midst of their trials by reminding them of the glory to follow. Finally, Mark’s clear concern for the Gentile mission fits in with the needs of pagan Rome. The suffering Christians cannot afford to forget the unbelieving society in which they live. In the light of this particular responsibility, Mark assures his readers of what even the Roman centurion began to recognize—surely Jesus <em>is<\/em> the Son of God (15:39).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The development of Mark’s narrative can be presented in six major divisions within a twofold structure:<\/p>\n<li>Introduction (1:1-13)<\/li>\n<li>Part I: Popularity and Opposition (1:14–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>1. Jesus’ authority and the Pharisees’ enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/li>\n<li>2. The people’s response (3:7–6:6a)<\/li>\n<li>3. The disciples’ misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>Part II: Darkness and Death (8:22–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>4. The Messiah’s mission and the disciples’ blind-ness (8:22–10:52)<\/li>\n<li>5. Final ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passion narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>Conclusion (16:1-8)<\/li>\n<p>Although one can hardly claim that this outline corresponds exactly to the author’s original plan (Mark may not have consciously worked out a detailed outline), the sixfold division provides a useful starting point for an interpretive summary of the contents.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Authority and the Pharisees’ Enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Immediately after the introductory portion (1:1-13), which describes John the Baptist’s ministry as well as Jesus’ baptism and temptation, Mark opens the body of the work with a summary statement (vv 14-15). In these two verses he seems to suggest that Jesus’ public ministry, characterized by the proclamation that God’s kingdom is about to be inaugurated, was occasioned by John’s imprisonment. This is followed by the call of the first disciples (vv 16-20) and then by a complex of stories (vv 21-38), all of which report incidents that took place in Capernaum, apparently within a 24-hour period: synagogue instruction followed by the healing of a demoniac; the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law; numerous other healings in the evening; prayer in a lonely place. The statement that Jesus proceeded to expand his ministry throughout the province of Galilee (v 39) is followed by the story of a leper’s cure (vv 40-45). Next are found a very important group of incidents (2:1–3:6), all of them focusing on Jesus’ conflicts with Jewish leaders: the healing and forgiveness of a paralytic; the call of Levi, whose dinner (attended by Jesus as well as by the hated tax gatherers) occasioned some disputes, particularly on the issue of fasting; and two significant stories regarding proper behavior on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<h5>The People’s Response (3:7–6:6a)<\/h5>\n<p>Mark opens this second section as he opened the first: a summary statement (Jesus’ healings by the lake—3:7-12) followed by the official appointment of 12 apostles (vv 13-19). Then follows a section that focuses on the kinds of charges brought against Jesus by his own family and by the scribes (vv 20-22), leading to a response touching on Satan, on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and on what constitutes true membership in his family (vv 23-35). Most of chapter 4 is devoted to Jesus’ parables of the kingdom—the sower, the seed growing secretly, the mustard seed—and includes statements on the nature and purpose of his teachings (4:10-12, 21-25, 33-34). In the evening Jesus and his disciples set out to cross the Sea of Galilee, leading to the stilling of the storm (vv 35-41), the healing of the Gerasene demoniac on the other side of the lake (5:1-20), and, on their return to Capernaum, the healing of a hemorrhaging woman and the raising of Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). The section concludes with Jesus’ visit to his hometown, Nazareth, and the rejection he suffered there (6:1-6a).<\/p>\n<h5>The Disciples’ Misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The third section begins with two introductory passages: the sending out of the 12 (6:6b-13) and the story of John the Baptist’s death (vv 14-29). When the disciples return, Jesus determines to seek some rest, but the crowds follow them; Jesus then teaches and feeds the 5,000 (vv 30-44) and, after crossing the lake (vv 45-52, which includes Jesus’ walk over the water), he performs numerous cures in and around Gennesaret (vv 53-56). Then follows a controversy with the Pharisees regarding the hand-washing ritual (7:1-8), and this incident leads to Christ’s assertion of the authority of God’s word over human tradition (vv 9-13) and to some general instructions on true purity (vv 14-23). The next several stories describe Jesus’ withdrawal from Galilee, first to Tyre, where a gentile woman’s daughter is healed (vv 24-30), then to the Decapolis, where he cures a deaf-mute (vv 31-37) and feeds a crowd of four thousand (8:1-10). The demand of the Pharisees for a sign (vv 11-12) leads to Jesus’ warning against the “leaven” of the Pharisees, a statement misunderstood by the disciples (vv 13-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Messiah’s Mission and the Disciples’ Blindness (8:22–10:52)<\/h5>\n<p>Still away from Galilee, but now in the nearby town of Bethsaida, Jesus heals a blind man (8:22-26). He then leads his disciples north toward Caesarea Philippi, which sets the stage for Peter’s confession (vv 27-30). This recognition on the part of the disciples (of whom Peter is in effect a representative) leads Jesus to prophesy his death, but Peter’s refusal to accept the prophecy calls forth a rebuke and instruction on discipleship (vv 31-38). The failure of the disciples to understand the necessity of Christ’s death provides the background for the Transfiguration (9:1-8), which assures Peter, John, and James that God’s kingdom will indeed come (note v 1); further, the Father himself enjoins them to believe Jesus’ prophecy (v 7). After some words about the resurrection and about the coming of Elijah (vv 9-13), Mark relates the healing of a demoniac boy (vv 14-29). Back in Galilee, a second prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 30-32) is followed, sadly, by a trivial discussion among the disciples as to who is the greatest (vv 33-37). Appropriately, one finds some further instructions concerning discipleship (vv 38-50). Mark next writes that Jesus left Galilee for the last time and began his journey toward the south. During this journey, Jesus delivered teachings on divorce and on the spiritual privileges of children (10:1-16), then met the rich young ruler (vv 17-22), an incident that leads to further words on discipleship (vv 23-31). A third prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 32-34) is again followed by selfish behavior on the part of the disciples, in this case an ambitious request from James and John (vv 35-40). The incident produces indignation among the rest of the disciples, thus necessitating another rebuke from their master, who himself came to serve and to die (vv 41-45). The section ends as it began—by reporting the cure of a blind man, Bartimaeus of Jericho in this story (vv 46-52).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/h5>\n<p>This section seems naturally to divide into three balanced subsections. The first one (11:1-26) includes three events: the Triumphal Entry, the withering of the fig tree, and the cleansing of the temple. The second subsection (11:27–12:44) is particularly important, for here is found Jesus’ final series of controversies with the Jewish leaders. The topics covered are the source of Jesus’ authority (11:27-33), the parable of the wicked husbandmen (12:1-12), the legitimacy of Caesar’s tax (vv 13-17), the Sadducees’ denial of resurrection (vv 18-27), the chief commandment (vv 28-34), and the question regarding David’s son (vv 35-37). This subsection ends with a warning against the scribes and with the story of the widow’s mite (vv 38-44). The third subsection (ch 13) is devoted completely to the Olivet discourse, with its prophecies of destruction, calamities, persecutions, deceivers, and final vindication. The discourse ends with various admonitions to keep alert.<\/p>\n<h5>The Passion Narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/h5>\n<p>This final section, which is introduced by a report of the priests’ plot (14:1-2), may be divided into two subsections. The first one relates the events leading up to Jesus’ trial (vv 3-52). They include the anointing of Jesus (vv 3-9), Judas’s betrayal (vv 10-11), the incidents connected with the Last Supper (vv 12-31), the scene at Gethsemane (vv 32-42), and the arrest (vv 43-52). The second subsection relates Jesus’ trial before the Jews (vv 53-65), Peter’s denials (vv 66-72), the trial before Pilate (15:1-15), the crucifixion (vv 16-41), and the burial (vv 42-47).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel concludes somewhat mysteriously, but no less triumphantly, with the news that Jesus has risen from the dead (16:1-8). The earliest surviving Greek manuscripts, usually regarded as the most reliable, end at verse 8; the majority of manuscripts, however, include an additional 12 verses that report Jesus’ appearances to his disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Mark, John; Matthew, Gospel of; Luke, Gospel of; Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARK, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 60 and 68.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorDateProvenance\">Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, although this is by no means certain). At one point Papias states, “The Elder used to say this also: Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that [Peter] remembered concerning the things both said and done by the Lord.” (This quotation was preserved by the fourth-century writer Eusebius of Caesarea in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.39.15.) One need not doubt the basic reliability of this statement. Mark—almost surely to be identified with the John Mark of Acts 12:12 (see also 1 Pt 5:13)—was a disciple of Peter, and the second Gospel owes its existence, at least in part, to the apostle’s reminiscences. It does not follow, however, that one has adequately characterized Mark’s work if that is all one says. For instance, Papias’s qualification, “though not in order,” indicates that Mark did not intend to write a chronological biography. Furthermore, Papias goes on to comment (according to one interpretation of his ambiguous words) that Mark (or Peter?) adapted the material to the teaching situation and that therefore Mark is absolved from any (implied) charges of inaccuracy. It appears that from the earliest times Christians appealed to the purposes and circumstances of Mark’s writing in order to account for difficulties in harmonizing the material found in the various Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Other statements from Christian writers in the second, third, and fourth centuries seem dependent on Papias’s testimony, but some additional data they provide may possess independent value. For example, a fairly early document (date uncertain) known as the Anti-Marcionite Prologue asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel somewhere in Italy after Peter’s death (in the mid-60s), and this testimony is considered reliable by many scholars. Still, the possibility that Mark composed his work before Peter’s martyrdom cannot be ruled out completely.<\/p>\n<p>Papias says nothing specific about <em>when<\/em> the Gospel was written. A small minority of scholars date Mark shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Another minority suggest a date in the 40s or 50s on the basis of a papyrus fragment discovered in Qumran called 7Q5. (According to José O’Callaghan, the fragment, which has been dated about <span>AD<\/span> 50–68, should be identified as Mark 6:52-53.) This fragment contains only 20 letters on one side, making the Markan reconstruction very uncertain. Few scholars are convinced that the text is Mark; some think it is part of 1 Enoch or Zechariah. An impressive majority of scholars date Mark in the 60s, with conservatives usually preferring the early years of the decade. Why this preference? If the theory of Markan priority is accepted, then clearly Mark was written before Luke; and since Luke is normally dated by conservatives about <span>AD<\/span> 62, Mark can be no later than <span>AD<\/span> 60 or 61. This line of argument, though strong, is not decisive. In the first place, Luke cannot be dated with complete certainty. Second, the view that Matthew and Luke used Mark (the working assumption of most scholars) is only a hypothesis, and one that is vigorously opposed by some writers. Third, a tradition going back to the second century (see above) asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel <em>after<\/em> Peter’s death, no earlier than <span>AD<\/span> 64. Fourth, one persuasive view regarding the occasion of this Gospel assumes that the Neronian persecution (<span>AD<\/span> 64) had begun. (According to a different view of the occasion, Mark was written after the beginning of the Jewish revolt in <span>AD<\/span> 66.) Therefore, while a date in the early 60s remains possible, it does not require committal.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the authorship of the second Gospel, there seems to be no compelling reason to deny Papias’s report that Mark (no doubt the John Mark of Acts 12:12) took down Peter’s reminiscences and that these became the basis of his work. Some scholars argue that the Gospel contains geographical inaccuracies (e.g., we have no evidence of a region called Dalmanutha, Mk 8:10) and that a native of Jerusalem such as Mark would have been more reliable in his information. However, the topographical problems in Mark, though real, need not be interpreted as inaccuracies (present ignorance of a place named Dalmanutha is hardly conclusive proof that it did not exist). Furthermore, in other respects (e.g., 14:54, 66) the Gospel reveals an impressive knowledge of local details. Many writers also point out bits of information that support a Petrine background, such as the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (1:30-31). In short, the internal evidence, while falling short of proof, does not at all undermine the tradition preserved by Papias. A generation ago, the trustworthiness of Papias’s testimony was almost universally accepted. This situation has changed somewhat, but even those scholars who adopt a skeptical attitude toward this tradition concede that it <em>may<\/em> be true.<\/p>\n<p>As attention turns to the provenance of the Gospel, the task becomes more difficult. Tradition going back to the second century asserts what may be already implied by Papias—namely, that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome. Although some scholars have suggested other possibilities, such as Galilee and Antioch, these have not proved satisfactory. Mark did spend some time in Rome, and some characteristics in the Gospel (such as Latinisms in the Greek and the explanation of Jewish customs, as in 7:3-4), while proving nothing, are certainly consonant with a Roman origin. Furthermore, one persuasive view of the occasion that gave rise to the Gospel assumes a background of persecution in Rome.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Distinctives\">Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>A number of characteristics of Mark set it apart from the other Gospels. For example, a word usually translated “immediately” occurs more than 40 times in Mark and only a dozen times in the rest of the NT. While this feature could be interpreted as a simple “mannerism,” consonant with Mark’s unpretentious, colloquial style, it certainly adds to the rapid flow of his narrative, which, dwelling more on Jesus’ activity than on his discourses (in contrast to Matthew and Luke), shifts from scene to scene with hardly a pause. Since the Gospel is also quite brief (Luke is nearly twice as long), one may wonder whether the author intended for it to be read at a sitting; even if read aloud, this would take only about one and a half hours. At any rate, there can be little doubt that the work conveys a sense of urgency.<\/p>\n<p>Other characteristics, however, prove more significant. Someone unfamiliar with the story of Jesus who happened to read Mark for the first time would no doubt be taken aback by its rather abrupt beginning. After a brief clause that stands as a sort of title (1:1), Mark moves on to describe in brief the ministry of John the Baptist. Then he introduces Jesus as coming from Nazareth without telling us anything whatever of his earlier life. Furthermore, over one-third of the book (including the so-called Passion narrative) is devoted to Jesus’ last week. These and other factors lend to the work a note of mystery, accentuated by the fact that at various points Mark calls attention to the fear or amazement gripping those who came in contact with Jesus (2:12; 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6; and several other passages, especially the strange words of 10:32). In addition, if one assumes that the Gospel originally ended with 16:8, Mark wished to leave his readers with the same sense of awe that the disciples experienced at Jesus’ resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>But how does one account for this fear and amazement? Mark’s clear answer is that Jesus, though truly a man, is also divine. While Mark’s Gospel exhibits the humanity of Jesus Christ (1:41; 3:5; 8:12; 10:14), his chief emphasis is on the Lord’s deity. Indeed, Mark introduces his book by referring to Jesus as “the Son of God” (a phrase omitted in some manuscripts, however), a position that is recognized both by the demons (3:11; 5:7) and by God himself (9:7). What may well be the true climax of the Gospel occurs at 15:39, where Mark writes that a Gentile, a Roman centurion, upon hearing Jesus’ death cry, exclaimed, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The author organized his Gospel according to a simple plan. The first eight chapters summarize the nature of Christ’s public ministry by alternating stories that show his growing popularity with stories that stress the disapproval of the Jewish leaders. This first half of the book, while indicating some of the tensions created by Jesus’ coming, gives the basic impression of success and general optimism. A significant shift then strikes the reader toward the end of chapter 8, particularly beginning with verse 31. At Caesarea Philippi, Peter has just confessed that Jesus is the Messiah, and now for the first time Jesus reveals that as Messiah he must die. The disciples become perplexed and discouraged and their pessimism mounts as this thought is brought home to them repeatedly (9:9, 31; 10:32-34; 14:17-25). In the end they desert their master (14:50).<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly, this pessimistic note is anticipated in the earlier part of the Gospel at three points: 3:6 (Jesus’ enemies plot his death); 6:6 (faithlessness in Nazareth); and 8:21 (lack of understanding in the disciples). Some scholars suggest that Mark used these three verses to indicate the first three divisions of his book. In addition, other scholars note that two healings of blind men (8:22-26; 10:46-52) seem to provide the opening and the conclusion of a section that emphasizes the spiritual blindness of the disciples. One more structural clue is 14:1, which clearly marks out the final section of the Gospel.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OccasionPurposeTheology\">Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>A few scholars think that Mark may have been combating a heretical sect that stressed the miracles of Jesus and viewed him purely as a divine wonder-worker. Although this view has not gained acceptance as originally formulated, a number of writers do see the Gospel as a theological corrective. Ralph Martin, who links Mark very closely with Paul, suggests that the evangelist is opposing some heretical groups who have distorted Paul’s message by placing exclusive stress on Christ as a <em>heavenly<\/em> figure (cf. the views that Paul himself opposes in Colossians). Mark responds to these aberrations by emphasizing, in Martin’s words, “the paradox of Jesus’ earthly life in which suffering and vindication form a two-beat rhythm.” Even if one decides that this reconstruction, too, is rather speculative, one may nevertheless retain certain elements in it as valid.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars, such as H. Kee, place emphasis on the apocalyptic background of Mark. Kee and others tie this element to the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66, but commitment to this particular historical connection is unnecessary to appreciate the great significance of Mark 13 (Jesus’ apocalyptic discourse) for those original readers of the Gospel who may have been undergoing persecution.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most satisfactory reconstruction links this Gospel to the Neronian persecution in the mid-60s. Mark, for example, is the only Gospel that records that Jesus, after being driven to the wilderness, found himself in the company of wild animals (1:13). This detail, according to William Lane, “was filled with special significance for those called to enter the arena where they stood helpless in the presence of wild beasts.” This interpretation, while not without difficulties, has the advantage of accounting for most of the available data. First, it is compatible with the strong tradition that assigns the origin of Mark’s work to Rome. Second, Mark speaks distinctly to those suffering persecution by introducing them quickly to John’s imprisonment and several other details. Third, related to this is Mark’s emphasis on discipleship. Christians facing persecution must have been tempted to relax the standards (4:17-19). Fourth, given this general situation, one can hardly doubt the significance of our Lord’s apocalyptic message in chapter 13, intended to encourage the disciples in the midst of their trials by reminding them of the glory to follow. Finally, Mark’s clear concern for the Gentile mission fits in with the needs of pagan Rome. The suffering Christians cannot afford to forget the unbelieving society in which they live. In the light of this particular responsibility, Mark assures his readers of what even the Roman centurion began to recognize—surely Jesus <em>is<\/em> the Son of God (15:39).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The development of Mark’s narrative can be presented in six major divisions within a twofold structure:<\/p>\n<li>Introduction (1:1-13)<\/li>\n<li>Part I: Popularity and Opposition (1:14–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>1. Jesus’ authority and the Pharisees’ enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/li>\n<li>2. The people’s response (3:7–6:6a)<\/li>\n<li>3. The disciples’ misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>Part II: Darkness and Death (8:22–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>4. The Messiah’s mission and the disciples’ blind-ness (8:22–10:52)<\/li>\n<li>5. Final ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passion narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>Conclusion (16:1-8)<\/li>\n<p>Although one can hardly claim that this outline corresponds exactly to the author’s original plan (Mark may not have consciously worked out a detailed outline), the sixfold division provides a useful starting point for an interpretive summary of the contents.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Authority and the Pharisees’ Enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Immediately after the introductory portion (1:1-13), which describes John the Baptist’s ministry as well as Jesus’ baptism and temptation, Mark opens the body of the work with a summary statement (vv 14-15). In these two verses he seems to suggest that Jesus’ public ministry, characterized by the proclamation that God’s kingdom is about to be inaugurated, was occasioned by John’s imprisonment. This is followed by the call of the first disciples (vv 16-20) and then by a complex of stories (vv 21-38), all of which report incidents that took place in Capernaum, apparently within a 24-hour period: synagogue instruction followed by the healing of a demoniac; the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law; numerous other healings in the evening; prayer in a lonely place. The statement that Jesus proceeded to expand his ministry throughout the province of Galilee (v 39) is followed by the story of a leper’s cure (vv 40-45). Next are found a very important group of incidents (2:1–3:6), all of them focusing on Jesus’ conflicts with Jewish leaders: the healing and forgiveness of a paralytic; the call of Levi, whose dinner (attended by Jesus as well as by the hated tax gatherers) occasioned some disputes, particularly on the issue of fasting; and two significant stories regarding proper behavior on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<h5>The People’s Response (3:7–6:6a)<\/h5>\n<p>Mark opens this second section as he opened the first: a summary statement (Jesus’ healings by the lake—3:7-12) followed by the official appointment of 12 apostles (vv 13-19). Then follows a section that focuses on the kinds of charges brought against Jesus by his own family and by the scribes (vv 20-22), leading to a response touching on Satan, on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and on what constitutes true membership in his family (vv 23-35). Most of chapter 4 is devoted to Jesus’ parables of the kingdom—the sower, the seed growing secretly, the mustard seed—and includes statements on the nature and purpose of his teachings (4:10-12, 21-25, 33-34). In the evening Jesus and his disciples set out to cross the Sea of Galilee, leading to the stilling of the storm (vv 35-41), the healing of the Gerasene demoniac on the other side of the lake (5:1-20), and, on their return to Capernaum, the healing of a hemorrhaging woman and the raising of Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). The section concludes with Jesus’ visit to his hometown, Nazareth, and the rejection he suffered there (6:1-6a).<\/p>\n<h5>The Disciples’ Misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The third section begins with two introductory passages: the sending out of the 12 (6:6b-13) and the story of John the Baptist’s death (vv 14-29). When the disciples return, Jesus determines to seek some rest, but the crowds follow them; Jesus then teaches and feeds the 5,000 (vv 30-44) and, after crossing the lake (vv 45-52, which includes Jesus’ walk over the water), he performs numerous cures in and around Gennesaret (vv 53-56). Then follows a controversy with the Pharisees regarding the hand-washing ritual (7:1-8), and this incident leads to Christ’s assertion of the authority of God’s word over human tradition (vv 9-13) and to some general instructions on true purity (vv 14-23). The next several stories describe Jesus’ withdrawal from Galilee, first to Tyre, where a gentile woman’s daughter is healed (vv 24-30), then to the Decapolis, where he cures a deaf-mute (vv 31-37) and feeds a crowd of four thousand (8:1-10). The demand of the Pharisees for a sign (vv 11-12) leads to Jesus’ warning against the “leaven” of the Pharisees, a statement misunderstood by the disciples (vv 13-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Messiah’s Mission and the Disciples’ Blindness (8:22–10:52)<\/h5>\n<p>Still away from Galilee, but now in the nearby town of Bethsaida, Jesus heals a blind man (8:22-26). He then leads his disciples north toward Caesarea Philippi, which sets the stage for Peter’s confession (vv 27-30). This recognition on the part of the disciples (of whom Peter is in effect a representative) leads Jesus to prophesy his death, but Peter’s refusal to accept the prophecy calls forth a rebuke and instruction on discipleship (vv 31-38). The failure of the disciples to understand the necessity of Christ’s death provides the background for the Transfiguration (9:1-8), which assures Peter, John, and James that God’s kingdom will indeed come (note v 1); further, the Father himself enjoins them to believe Jesus’ prophecy (v 7). After some words about the resurrection and about the coming of Elijah (vv 9-13), Mark relates the healing of a demoniac boy (vv 14-29). Back in Galilee, a second prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 30-32) is followed, sadly, by a trivial discussion among the disciples as to who is the greatest (vv 33-37). Appropriately, one finds some further instructions concerning discipleship (vv 38-50). Mark next writes that Jesus left Galilee for the last time and began his journey toward the south. During this journey, Jesus delivered teachings on divorce and on the spiritual privileges of children (10:1-16), then met the rich young ruler (vv 17-22), an incident that leads to further words on discipleship (vv 23-31). A third prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 32-34) is again followed by selfish behavior on the part of the disciples, in this case an ambitious request from James and John (vv 35-40). The incident produces indignation among the rest of the disciples, thus necessitating another rebuke from their master, who himself came to serve and to die (vv 41-45). The section ends as it began—by reporting the cure of a blind man, Bartimaeus of Jericho in this story (vv 46-52).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/h5>\n<p>This section seems naturally to divide into three balanced subsections. The first one (11:1-26) includes three events: the Triumphal Entry, the withering of the fig tree, and the cleansing of the temple. The second subsection (11:27–12:44) is particularly important, for here is found Jesus’ final series of controversies with the Jewish leaders. The topics covered are the source of Jesus’ authority (11:27-33), the parable of the wicked husbandmen (12:1-12), the legitimacy of Caesar’s tax (vv 13-17), the Sadducees’ denial of resurrection (vv 18-27), the chief commandment (vv 28-34), and the question regarding David’s son (vv 35-37). This subsection ends with a warning against the scribes and with the story of the widow’s mite (vv 38-44). The third subsection (ch 13) is devoted completely to the Olivet discourse, with its prophecies of destruction, calamities, persecutions, deceivers, and final vindication. The discourse ends with various admonitions to keep alert.<\/p>\n<h5>The Passion Narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/h5>\n<p>This final section, which is introduced by a report of the priests’ plot (14:1-2), may be divided into two subsections. The first one relates the events leading up to Jesus’ trial (vv 3-52). They include the anointing of Jesus (vv 3-9), Judas’s betrayal (vv 10-11), the incidents connected with the Last Supper (vv 12-31), the scene at Gethsemane (vv 32-42), and the arrest (vv 43-52). The second subsection relates Jesus’ trial before the Jews (vv 53-65), Peter’s denials (vv 66-72), the trial before Pilate (15:1-15), the crucifixion (vv 16-41), and the burial (vv 42-47).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel concludes somewhat mysteriously, but no less triumphantly, with the news that Jesus has risen from the dead (16:1-8). The earliest surviving Greek manuscripts, usually regarded as the most reliable, end at verse 8; the majority of manuscripts, however, include an additional 12 verses that report Jesus’ appearances to his disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Mark, John; Matthew, Gospel of; Luke, Gospel of; Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARK, Gospel of Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between AD 60 and 68. Preview • Author, Date, Provenance • Distinctives • Structure • Occasion, Purpose, Theology • Content Author, Date, Provenance Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, alt...","summary_en":"MARK, Gospel of Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between AD 60 and 68. Preview • Author, Date, Provenance • Distinctives • Structure • Occasion, Purpose, Theology • Content Author, Date, Provenance Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, alt...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":39973,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit","title_en":"Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit","content_ro":"<h3>Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is a sin mentioned only in Mark 3:28-29 and its parallels, Luke 12:10 and Matthew 12:31. The context in Mark portrays unbelievers reacting to Jesus’ sudden popularity and startling power in two ways: (1) his family considered him insane and tried to take him home; and (2) the religious leaders, who had already proclaimed him a blasphemer (Mk 2:1-12), attributed his success to demon-possession. Matthew adds that the religious leaders were Pharisees upset by a particular healing. (Luke includes the saying in a totally different context, one of confessing Christ.) Jesus, pointing out that the charge of demon-possession was illogical, also stated strongly that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit can never be forgiven. Jesus was saying that to slander the Holy Spirit is worse even than insulting or blaspheming the Son of Man or God himself (a crime punishable by death in the OT; see Lv 24:16). Yet Jesus said that those sins are forgivable. Many Jews believed that death forgave all sins, so when Jesus called blasphemy against the Holy Spirit “an eternal sin,” he was making it serious indeed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The religious leaders to whom Jesus spoke had seen clear, public, and compelling evidence of the good hand of God. By calling that power evil or demonic, they were wickedly and consciously rejecting God, his power, and his saving grace. That was willful and high-handed sin by those who had seen the truth but rejected it and slandered it to others. Thus, the “unforgivable sin” is not some serious moral failure nor persistence in a particular sin nor even insulting or rejecting Jesus in blindness or a fit of rebellion. It is conscious rejection of the “good power of God.” It represents a perversion of the mind in which God and Satan are willfully confused, a free choice of evil rather than good.<\/p>\n<p>How can this sin be unforgivable if God is always willing to forgive? Because it has gone beyond the possibility of recovery on the sinner’s part and because God respects the freedom of persons. It is unrepentable because the person, having refused so stubbornly to repent, finally becomes unable to repent; evidence is in, and such a one will still reject the truth while knowing it to be true.<\/p>\n<p>From the definition it is clear that anyone who believes he or she has committed “the unforgivable sin” could not have done so; a troubled conscience and that kind of sin could never coexist. The fact that a person feels remorse proves that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has not yet been committed. On the other hand, Jesus’ teaching about it warns all who know the truth of God not to reject that truth or to abandon their faith.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>This is a sin mentioned only in Mark 3:28-29 and its parallels, Luke 12:10 and Matthew 12:31. The context in Mark portrays unbelievers reacting to Jesus’ sudden popularity and startling power in two ways: (1) his family considered him insane and tried to take him home; and (2) the religious leaders, who had already proclaimed him a blasphemer (Mk 2:1-12), attributed his success to demon-possession. Matthew adds that the religious leaders were Pharisees upset by a particular healing. (Luke includes the saying in a totally different context, one of confessing Christ.) Jesus, pointing out that the charge of demon-possession was illogical, also stated strongly that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit can never be forgiven. Jesus was saying that to slander the Holy Spirit is worse even than insulting or blaspheming the Son of Man or God himself (a crime punishable by death in the OT; see Lv 24:16). Yet Jesus said that those sins are forgivable. Many Jews believed that death forgave all sins, so when Jesus called blasphemy against the Holy Spirit “an eternal sin,” he was making it serious indeed.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The religious leaders to whom Jesus spoke had seen clear, public, and compelling evidence of the good hand of God. By calling that power evil or demonic, they were wickedly and consciously rejecting God, his power, and his saving grace. That was willful and high-handed sin by those who had seen the truth but rejected it and slandered it to others. Thus, the “unforgivable sin” is not some serious moral failure nor persistence in a particular sin nor even insulting or rejecting Jesus in blindness or a fit of rebellion. It is conscious rejection of the “good power of God.” It represents a perversion of the mind in which God and Satan are willfully confused, a free choice of evil rather than good.<\/p>\n<p>How can this sin be unforgivable if God is always willing to forgive? Because it has gone beyond the possibility of recovery on the sinner’s part and because God respects the freedom of persons. It is unrepentable because the person, having refused so stubbornly to repent, finally becomes unable to repent; evidence is in, and such a one will still reject the truth while knowing it to be true.<\/p>\n<p>From the definition it is clear that anyone who believes he or she has committed “the unforgivable sin” could not have done so; a troubled conscience and that kind of sin could never coexist. The fact that a person feels remorse proves that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit has not yet been committed. On the other hand, Jesus’ teaching about it warns all who know the truth of God not to reject that truth or to abandon their faith.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit This is a sin mentioned only in Mark 3:28-29 and its parallels, Luke 12:10 and Matthew 12:31. The context in Mark portrays unbelievers reacting to Jesus’ sudden popularity and startling power in two ways: (1) his family considered him insane and tried to take him home; and (2) the religious leaders, who had already proclaimed him a blasphemer (Mk 2:1-12), attributed his success to demon-possession. Matthew adds that the religious leaders were Pharisees upset ...","summary_en":"Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit This is a sin mentioned only in Mark 3:28-29 and its parallels, Luke 12:10 and Matthew 12:31. The context in Mark portrays unbelievers reacting to Jesus’ sudden popularity and startling power in two ways: (1) his family considered him insane and tried to take him home; and (2) the religious leaders, who had already proclaimed him a blasphemer (Mk 2:1-12), attributed his success to demon-possession. Matthew adds that the religious leaders were Pharisees upset ...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55165,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","summary_en":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55166,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","summary_en":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55167,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","summary_en":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82791,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","summary_en":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82792,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","summary_en":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82793,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","summary_en":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110417,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","summary_en":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110418,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","summary_en":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110419,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","summary_en":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138043,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1–3:6<\/strong> Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","summary_en":"2:1–3:6 Five controversy stories (2:1-12, 13-17, 18-22, 23-28; 3:1-6), grouped by their common theme, reveal Jesus’ great authority and the leaders’ hostility toward him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138044,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1-12<\/strong> This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","summary_en":"2:1-12 This controversy story is also a miracle story, which links it to the previous collection (1:21-45).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138045,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:1<\/strong> <em>back home:<\/em> See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","summary_en":"2:1 back home: See Matt 4:13. The crowd’s size shows Jesus’ popularity.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":28865,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Paralysis*, Paralytic*, Paralyzed","title_en":"Paralysis*, Paralytic*, Paralyzed","content_ro":"<h3>PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED<\/h3>\n<p>Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Jerusalem (Jn 5:3), and represented among those cured by Philip in Samaria (Acts 8:7). The paralyzed servant of the centurion was described by Luke as very sick and at the point of death (Lk 7:2). This man was probably victimized by an often fatal form of paralysis that begins in the legs and spreads rapidly upward through the rest of the body. The paralytic at Capernaum was most likely ailing from paraplegia, a paralysis of the lower half of the body (Mt 9:2, 6; Mk 2:3-10; Lk 5:18, 24). This disease may have been brought on by an injury at birth or by damage to the spinal cord. Perhaps Aeneas, whom Peter healed at Lydda, also suffered from paraplegia (Acts 9:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED<\/h3>\n<p>Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry.<\/p>\n<p>Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Jerusalem (Jn 5:3), and represented among those cured by Philip in Samaria (Acts 8:7). The paralyzed servant of the centurion was described by Luke as very sick and at the point of death (Lk 7:2). This man was probably victimized by an often fatal form of paralysis that begins in the legs and spreads rapidly upward through the rest of the body. The paralytic at Capernaum was most likely ailing from paraplegia, a paralysis of the lower half of the body (Mt 9:2, 6; Mk 2:3-10; Lk 5:18, 24). This disease may have been brought on by an injury at birth or by damage to the spinal cord. Perhaps Aeneas, whom Peter healed at Lydda, also suffered from paraplegia (Acts 9:33).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Disease; Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry. Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Je...","summary_en":"PARALYSIS*, PARALYTIC*, PARALYZED Symptom of an organic disease of the central nervous system affecting the temporary or permanent loss of sensation and\/or voluntary muscle control. This degenerative condition was usually incurable. A few cases of paralysis (palsy) are mentioned in the NT, all of which occur in connection with Christ’s healing ministry. Paralytics were included in the group of ailing people seeking Jesus’ healing in Galilee (Mt 4:24), numbered among the sick at Bethesda in Je...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":16579,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Homes and Dwellings","title_en":"Homes and Dwellings","content_ro":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","summary_en":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55168,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","summary_en":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82794,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","summary_en":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110420,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","summary_en":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138046,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:4<\/strong> <em>because of the crowd:<\/em> See 2:1. • <em>The roof<\/em> would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally <em>dug a hole<\/em> to make an opening.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","summary_en":"2:4 because of the crowd: See 2:1. • The roof would have been flat, constructed of mud, thatch, and branches. They literally dug a hole to make an opening.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":11825,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12739,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14547,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19460,"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":55169,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","summary_en":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82795,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","summary_en":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110421,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","summary_en":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138047,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:5<\/strong> Jesus saw the <em>faith<\/em> of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • <em>your sins are forgiven:<\/em> Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","summary_en":"2:5 Jesus saw the faith of the paralytic and the four men who brought him. • your sins are forgiven: Those listening understood Jesus’ words as a claim to divine authority (2:6-10; Luke 7:48-49).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":10154,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Education","title_en":"Education","content_ro":"<h3>EDUCATION<\/h3>\n<p>The act or process of educating or being educated. The original purpose of Jewish education was to teach children to know and understand their special relationship with God, to teach them to serve him, and to educate them in holiness. Later Jewish education included character development and the history of God’s people (particularly through rehearsing his acts of deliverance). Because of that education, the Jews knew the Mosaic law and their own history, and so, during periods of subjection to foreign powers, they were able to maintain their national pride. In modern times they have reestablished themselves as a nation (1948).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Education in the Home<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Education<\/p>\n<p>• Formal Education<\/p>\n<p>• Literacy among the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Education in Surrounding Cultures<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EducationintheHome\">Education in the Home<\/p>\n<p>The priority given to education stemmed from the value of children in the Jewish family. Children were a great joy and reward (Ps 127:3-5). Education in the home began soon after a child could talk, and certainly by the age of three. Parents taught prayers and songs, which children learned by repetition, just as children today learn nursery rhymes.<\/p>\n<p>At home, children became aware of certain religious items and symbols. They were encouraged to ask about the meaning of the annual Passover ritual (Ex 12:26), which served throughout Hebrew history as a fundamental means of instruction about the nature and significance of God’s power in human life. Children undoubtedly had questions about objects they encountered, whether sacred vessels, ornaments, or clothing used in the tabernacle or temple worship, or more mundane things of everyday life.<\/p>\n<p>Parental responsibility for education was clearly defined. A father was expected to give his son instruction in religion and in the history of the Hebrew people. He was also specifically required to teach his son a trade, often his own, since a boy without a trade was thought to have been trained for life as a thief. A father’s other responsibilities included finding his son a wife and teaching him to swim.<\/p>\n<p>Rabbis held that women could not study the Law because they were “of light mind.” Nonetheless, influential women in the Bible include Deborah (Jgs 4:4-5), Jael (vv 18-24), the wise woman of Tekoa (2 Sm 14:2-20), the wise woman of Abel (20:16-22), Lois, Eunice, and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; Rom 16:3; 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish mother played a considerable role in a child’s education, particularly in the earliest years. A mother was expected to assist in teaching her sons, but her major responsibility was to train her daughters. Since daughters were less highly esteemed than sons, a girl’s education took place entirely in the home. The mother was responsible for educating her daughters to be successful homemakers: obedient, capable, and virtuous wives. Girls learned the skills of cooking, spinning, weaving, dyeing, caring for children, and managing slaves. They learned how to grind grain and at times helped with the harvest. Occasionally they were expected to help guard the vineyard or, if they had no brothers, to help care for the flocks.<\/p>\n<p>Girls probably learned music and dancing and were expected to have good manners and high moral standards. They were taught to read, and some learned to write and reckon weights and measures. In exceptional circumstances a girl might receive an advanced education privately at home from a tutor.<\/p>\n<p>Even when education was entirely home-centered, it is probable that most wealthy and especially royal children were instructed by a tutor, following a tradition established by other Near Eastern peoples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousEducation\">Religious Education<\/p>\n<p>At an early age children accompanied their parents to religious services. At the great festivals they were introduced to important episodes in Jewish history. The Jews, an agricultural people, believed that agricultural knowledge had been revealed by God and that tending the ground was a basic human responsibility. Like some other Near Eastern nations, they believed that the land belonged to God. They were merely tenants. If a crop failed, it was because God withheld rain, but he would do that only if the people were sinful.<\/p>\n<p>The celebrations of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles were associated with the harvest. Throughout the biblical period, those festivals remained closely identified with the growing season. Such occasions became educational opportunities for children. They learned that the Passover commemorated the deliverance of their ancestors from slavery in Egypt. At Pentecost the Jewish people remembered God giving the law to Moses on Mt Sinai. The Feast of Tabernacles, with its green booths made from tree branches, commemorated God’s faithfulness to the Jews on their seemingly endless journey to the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>An example of a ceremony used as a teaching tool is the Passover ritual, which, of the three great festivals, was the least directly connected in origin with the harvest. That feast, which was immediately followed by a seven-day period known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Lv 23:6), was associated with the beginning of the barley harvest in April. (The exodus from Egypt had taken place at that time of year.)<\/p>\n<p>In the Passover ceremony the priest would take one of the first sheaves of the barley harvest and wave it before the Lord (Lv 23:9-11). Before that, the men would choose a barley field at random and bind some of the best sheaves, leaving them standing. The following evening three men would go out to that field with sickles and baskets to reap those specifically prepared sheaves. As onlookers (including the children) gathered to observe the ceremony, the reapers would ask the crowd certain traditional questions. Year by year the children saw that ritual and heard the answers. The barley was cut and taken to the temple court, where it was threshed and winnowed. Some of it was mixed with oil and incense and used as an offering. The remainder went to the priests.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FormalEducation\">Formal Education<\/p>\n<p>Jewish education during the biblical period helped Jews to know of the Law, study the history of the Jewish people, and become proficient in reading, writing, and a certain amount of arithmetic. To that, incidental information such as the medicinal value of certain herbs (see 1 Kgs 4:33) might sometimes be added.<\/p>\n<h5>Teachers<\/h5>\n<p>Priests instructed the people in the knowledge of God. As officers of the synagogue, the Levites also performed a teaching role (cf. Dt 33:10; 2 Chr 35:3). Before the exile, the prophets assumed the role of instructors, teaching the historical heritage of the people and acting as critics of injustice and improper social behavior. Their responsibility was to interpret the law for contemporary society. By the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, the prophets’ role as instructors had passed to the scribes and to others designated as teachers.<\/p>\n<p>In the centuries before Christ, scribes not only transcribed and preserved the traditions in written form but were students and interpreters of the law. The scribes were known as “doctors of the law” (Lk 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), lawyers (Mt 22:35), and rabbis (23:8). All higher education was in their hands, and they developed a complex system of instruction known as “the tradition of the elders” (15:2-6). Although the scribes needed leisure for their scholarly pursuits, they did not despise laborers. Most of them, in fact, practiced a trade as a means of support when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>Although the scribes were influential in the time of Christ (Mt 23:1-2), they undoubtedly found, like the prophets before them, that their words were not always heeded. The scribes, who exercised an important influence over contemporary life and morals, were notable for their fierce opposition to Jesus (Mk 2:6) and to the early church (Acts 4:5; 6:12).<\/p>\n<p>By the NT era, the entire community was expected to establish and maintain elementary schools. The community was also responsible for financing the education of poor or orphaned children. Out of high regard for earlier priests, prophets, and scribes, and because of the eminent position given to education, teachers were highly esteemed by the Jewish people. Because God had given them the law, it was of greatest importance. One who worked as God’s servant expounding the law was therefore the most important person in the community. To be a teacher was life’s highest privilege and the most significant task a man could perform.<\/p>\n<p>Teachers were expected to demonstrate exceptional character along with their academic qualifications. They were expected to keep children from having contact with anything harmful. They were not to show bitterness or give preference to one child over another. Rather than threatening, they were to explain right and wrong and the harmfulness of sin. Teachers were expected to keep promises to children lest the students grow accustomed to broken words and lies. Teachers were to be eventempered, never impatient or lacking in understanding, always prepared to repeat explanations. It was said that children should be treated like young heifers, with their burdens increased daily. Yet any teacher who was too severe was dismissed.<\/p>\n<h5>Subject Matter<\/h5>\n<p>Early education consisted of learning the law through listening and oral repetition, along with the study of the written text. The content of the law covered three main areas: ceremonial, civil, and criminal. Students needed to master these, preparing themselves to take responsibility for observing the law as adults.<\/p>\n<p>The Scriptures contained such a variety of writings that pupils learned about religion, history, law, morals, and manners, plus reading, writing, and arithmetic. They studied from great literature; along with the Law, they used the books of Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes extensively as texts. The Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that some classical Hebrew was still being spoken in NT times. Students who commonly spoke Aramaic or Greek were faced with a difficult situation when learning the Hebrew of the OT. The problem was especially complex because the Hebrew was written without any vowel sounds. Those had to be memorized in association with the consonants of the text.<\/p>\n<p>Since the ancient Hebrews were generally regarded as the most proficient musicians and singers in the Near East, it is probable that basic instruction in singing and playing instruments, such as the pipe and harp, was received at home. Although no Hebrew hymns have survived in musical form, temple singers would almost certainly have been familiar with the kind of music theory known among the Canaanites. (A musical text recovered from Ugarit [Ras Shamra] consisted of a ballad or a hymn inscribed on clay with curious musical symbols that long defied identification. Dating to perhaps 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, that Canaanite text has been described as the “oldest sheet music in the world.”)<\/p>\n<p>During the exile especially, great emphasis was placed on recording and preserving ancient customs and ceremonies in order to maintain the distinctiveness of Hebrew culture. The captives recognized the importance of keeping alive their national heritage and the Law during the years they were living in an alien culture.<\/p>\n<p>The synagogue developed during the exile as a place for the study of religion and for prayer, becoming the center of instruction in the Jewish faith. Previously, the temple at Jerusalem had been the only place for sacrifice. Because that ritual could not be performed in Babylon, it was natural for the synagogue to increase in importance in worship as well as in education.<\/p>\n<p>The exile brought about fundamental changes in Jewish life in areas other than the purely religious. Education received considerable stimulation from the Jewish exiles’ contact with the more sophisticated culture of the Babylonians. The Babylonian law code was a precise and well-established feature of life. Schools and libraries in Babylonia had been in existence for many centuries. Mesopotamian knowledge of medicine, astronomy, mathematics, architecture, and engineering was far superior to that of the Jews. In that intellectual environment the literature of the Jews took on new meaning; it was from that period that the books of Ezekiel and Daniel emerged.<\/p>\n<p>In the postexilic period, teaching was based extensively on Proverbs and the apocryphal books of Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon. From those works the Jews received practical training for a successful life. The scribes taught that wisdom came from God and that those who obeyed the commandments would bring joy and honor to others.<\/p>\n<p>Under Persian rule in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Jews had been encouraged to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. After 332 <span>BC<\/span>, when Alexander the Great defeated the Persian king Darius, strong efforts were made to Hellenize the conquered peoples. The Greek language was introduced along with Greek religion, political procedures, and educational methods. The drive for Hellenization continued under the rule of the Ptolemies (a Macedonian family line that ruled Egypt) and the Seleucids (a Syrian dynasty). Coincident with the establishment of foreign rule came the dominance of the Jewish priesthood in Judean political matters. Greek influence was seen in the enriched aesthetic appreciation typical of certain Jewish rulers.<\/p>\n<p>Although Greek philosophy and sports remained outside the realm of Jewish education, there was a noticeable decline in Jewish religious and moral standards in the Hellenistic period. Some Jews were eager to obtain advancement from the foreign masters by adopting the Greek culture. Others fought desperately to preserve their Jewish heritage. During Roman times, the foreign influence was again ignored by faithful Jews whenever possible.<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching Methods<\/h5>\n<p>Teaching methods, developed from memorizing the Law, stressed the importance of retention and recollection. Children were taught to memorize as soon as they could talk, and they were trained to repeat the exact words so that no nuance of meaning would be altered. The alphabet was taught and memorized by being repeatedly written and drilled. Students copied and recopied passages from the written Law in precise, neat handwriting. Any piece of writing containing a mistake was considered dangerous, since it might imprint the wrong word or spelling on the learner’s mind. Reading aloud was recommended as an aid to memorization.<\/p>\n<p>To aid learning, each boy was also given a personal text beginning with the first letter of his name and ending with the last. As soon as he demonstrated his ability to read, he received a scroll that contained the first words of Deuteronomy 6:4: “Hear, O Israel: The <span>Lord<\/span> our God is one <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>rsv<\/span>). That was recited every morning and evening in postexilic times, along with the Hallel (or psalm of praise), the story of Creation, and the main part of the Law contained in Leviticus.<\/p>\n<p>Teachings also came in the form of proverbs or parables, a device later used by Jesus (Mk 4:1-2). An open sharing of knowledge occurred in question-and-answer periods (for example, the visit of the 12-year-old Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem, Lk 2:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>Very little information is available on education in the early Christian era. We know that Jesus could read and expound the Scriptures and was knowledgeable enough to discuss theology with the learned men in the temple. He probably learned at home and received the elementary education common to most Jewish boys at that period.<\/p>\n<h5>Discipline<\/h5>\n<p>Discipline, almost always an important element in education, was important to the ancient Hebrews. A system of reward and punishment was used in which corporal chastisement was normal. Punishment was considered to be an outward symbol of God’s love and concern for the instruction of his people (Ps 94:8-13), although the Jews as a people did not always learn from those corrections (Jer 5:3; Am 4:6-13). A child was thought to need “breaking” like a horse: “A horse that is untamed turns out to be stubborn, and a son unrestrained turns out to be wilful” (Ecclus 30:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Adult Education<\/h5>\n<p>When Ezra the scribe returned from Babylon with a copy of the Book of the Law, he taught it to the Levites and to the people. That material, together with the book of Proverbs and literature from the preexilic and exilic periods, became basic in Jewish education. In the postexilic period, priests traveled to the towns, addressing people in the synagogue on the Sabbath and in the square on market days, when a large crowd would be gathered. Some individuals may have extended their learning through discussion with the elders (cf. Ez 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>For those who continued their education, the next phase was probably instruction by scribes. The scribes, leaders of a Jewish sect called Pharisees, had developed Ezra’s principles into strict rules on tithing, ritual purity, and synagogue worship. As a young man, Saul of Tarsus came to Jerusalem to study with Gamaliel, an honored rabbi (Acts 22:3). At that time the curriculum was an advanced study of theological law, both written and oral, along with the rites and ceremonies of Jewish culture.<\/p>\n<h5>School Buildings<\/h5>\n<p>By NT times, some schools operated in special buildings and others in the teachers’ own houses, but most were attached to the synagogue. When a separate building was designed, it was considered inadvisable to construct it in a crowded area. In a large town the community was expected to provide two schools, especially if a river divided the town. A school did not operate in the heat of the day (between 10 <span>am<\/span> and 3 <span>pm<\/span>), and would meet only four hours a day in July and August. Class size was expected to be 25, with a teacher and an assistant for 40 students and two teachers for 50. At school the boys sat on the ground at the teacher’s feet and learned from the Scriptures. Thus, the school became known as the “House of the Book.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteracyamongtheJews\">Literacy among the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The extent of literacy among Jews over the centuries is difficult to determine, but indications can be found from specific examples. The book of Joshua describes three men chosen from each tribe who had to prepare a written report about the land of Canaan (Jos 18:4-9). Later, Gideon captured a youth who was able to make a written list of the important men of the city (Jgs 8:14). Writing was probably a common skill since the Israelites were exhorted to use it frequently (Dt 6:9; 27:2-8). Simple mathematical terms could be written and understood by boys, and there are indications of familiarity with the geometrical relationship of a circle’s radius and circumference (the concept of pi; see 2 Chr 4:2). The development of cursive script implies widespread use of writing from at least the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. It is noteworthy that a synagogue service could be performed by any ten men in the congregation, which presupposes that there were more than 10 men in any synagogue who were literate enough to fulfill that duty.<\/p>\n<p>When fears of Hellenism were strong and the existence of Judaism was threatened in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, it was decreed that every Jewish boy should attend elementary school. Since such a system probably already existed, that decree merely made attendance compulsory for all males up to 16 or 17 years of age. No doubt the reason was that thorough knowledge and careful observance of the Law were vital to the survival of the Jewish heritage.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua ben-Gamala (high priest <span>AD<\/span> 63–65) is considered the founder of universal education. His instructions for setting up schools in towns and villages were precise, requiring attendance of boys from the age of six or seven years. The community was responsible for setting up a school and maintaining a teacher in any town where there were at least ten Jewish families. Fathers were required to see that their sons attended school. When a family lived in an isolated area, a teacher often lived with the family. Teachers were probably paid either by the family or from a community tax, although scribes were not paid directly for the instruction they gave. It is difficult to know if the goal of universal elementary education was attained.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EducationinSurroundingCultures\">Education in Surrounding Cultures<\/p>\n<p>The theological emphasis of Hebrew education contrasted sharply with the aims of education in Greece and Rome. Those societies, however, were also concerned with developing a particular type of character.<\/p>\n<p>In Sparta the purpose of educational training was to develop young men to be fighters who would subject themselves to the welfare of the state. Character development was achieved by eliminating luxuries and by systematically disciplining mind and body through physical activity. Survival techniques encouraged resourcefulness and initiative. Girls received the same education, since it was considered important to develop women who could give birth to strong warriors.<\/p>\n<p>In Athens education was deemed essential to life. Because transmission of culture would enable boys to become perfect citizens, they were taught letters, music, morals and manners, mathematics, and gymnastics (development of a healthy body). Education was ideally a noble pursuit—a training of the mind, the birthright of every citizen—but in practice it was restricted to a small section of the aristocracy. The educated despised earning a living as a way of life suitable only for slaves. Women received no education. The teacher in elementary schools was a lowly individual.<\/p>\n<p>Roman education prepared a boy mentally and physically for farm, battlefield, or wherever his services were required by the state. Education was a family responsibility—the boy learning first from his mother, then from his father. Basic reading, writing, arithmetic, language, structure, and debating skills were taught, sometimes by private tutors. When schools were developed, they seem to have been noisy, storefront activities operated by poorly paid teachers. Girls were taught housekeeping skills at home.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian boys attended the “House of the Books” for their studies and learned reading and elementary arithmetic. Writing in hieroglyphs on papyrus was the most difficult task. Like students in other cultures, boys were subject to corporal punishment. Egyptian teachers considered that “a boy’s ears are in his back,” following up that conviction with frequent use of a cane.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EDUCATION<\/h3>\n<p>The act or process of educating or being educated. The original purpose of Jewish education was to teach children to know and understand their special relationship with God, to teach them to serve him, and to educate them in holiness. Later Jewish education included character development and the history of God’s people (particularly through rehearsing his acts of deliverance). Because of that education, the Jews knew the Mosaic law and their own history, and so, during periods of subjection to foreign powers, they were able to maintain their national pride. In modern times they have reestablished themselves as a nation (1948).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Education in the Home<\/p>\n<p>• Religious Education<\/p>\n<p>• Formal Education<\/p>\n<p>• Literacy among the Jews<\/p>\n<p>• Education in Surrounding Cultures<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EducationintheHome\">Education in the Home<\/p>\n<p>The priority given to education stemmed from the value of children in the Jewish family. Children were a great joy and reward (Ps 127:3-5). Education in the home began soon after a child could talk, and certainly by the age of three. Parents taught prayers and songs, which children learned by repetition, just as children today learn nursery rhymes.<\/p>\n<p>At home, children became aware of certain religious items and symbols. They were encouraged to ask about the meaning of the annual Passover ritual (Ex 12:26), which served throughout Hebrew history as a fundamental means of instruction about the nature and significance of God’s power in human life. Children undoubtedly had questions about objects they encountered, whether sacred vessels, ornaments, or clothing used in the tabernacle or temple worship, or more mundane things of everyday life.<\/p>\n<p>Parental responsibility for education was clearly defined. A father was expected to give his son instruction in religion and in the history of the Hebrew people. He was also specifically required to teach his son a trade, often his own, since a boy without a trade was thought to have been trained for life as a thief. A father’s other responsibilities included finding his son a wife and teaching him to swim.<\/p>\n<p>Rabbis held that women could not study the Law because they were “of light mind.” Nonetheless, influential women in the Bible include Deborah (Jgs 4:4-5), Jael (vv 18-24), the wise woman of Tekoa (2 Sm 14:2-20), the wise woman of Abel (20:16-22), Lois, Eunice, and Priscilla (Acts 18:2; Rom 16:3; 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish mother played a considerable role in a child’s education, particularly in the earliest years. A mother was expected to assist in teaching her sons, but her major responsibility was to train her daughters. Since daughters were less highly esteemed than sons, a girl’s education took place entirely in the home. The mother was responsible for educating her daughters to be successful homemakers: obedient, capable, and virtuous wives. Girls learned the skills of cooking, spinning, weaving, dyeing, caring for children, and managing slaves. They learned how to grind grain and at times helped with the harvest. Occasionally they were expected to help guard the vineyard or, if they had no brothers, to help care for the flocks.<\/p>\n<p>Girls probably learned music and dancing and were expected to have good manners and high moral standards. They were taught to read, and some learned to write and reckon weights and measures. In exceptional circumstances a girl might receive an advanced education privately at home from a tutor.<\/p>\n<p>Even when education was entirely home-centered, it is probable that most wealthy and especially royal children were instructed by a tutor, following a tradition established by other Near Eastern peoples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ReligiousEducation\">Religious Education<\/p>\n<p>At an early age children accompanied their parents to religious services. At the great festivals they were introduced to important episodes in Jewish history. The Jews, an agricultural people, believed that agricultural knowledge had been revealed by God and that tending the ground was a basic human responsibility. Like some other Near Eastern nations, they believed that the land belonged to God. They were merely tenants. If a crop failed, it was because God withheld rain, but he would do that only if the people were sinful.<\/p>\n<p>The celebrations of the Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles were associated with the harvest. Throughout the biblical period, those festivals remained closely identified with the growing season. Such occasions became educational opportunities for children. They learned that the Passover commemorated the deliverance of their ancestors from slavery in Egypt. At Pentecost the Jewish people remembered God giving the law to Moses on Mt Sinai. The Feast of Tabernacles, with its green booths made from tree branches, commemorated God’s faithfulness to the Jews on their seemingly endless journey to the Promised Land.<\/p>\n<p>An example of a ceremony used as a teaching tool is the Passover ritual, which, of the three great festivals, was the least directly connected in origin with the harvest. That feast, which was immediately followed by a seven-day period known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread (Lv 23:6), was associated with the beginning of the barley harvest in April. (The exodus from Egypt had taken place at that time of year.)<\/p>\n<p>In the Passover ceremony the priest would take one of the first sheaves of the barley harvest and wave it before the Lord (Lv 23:9-11). Before that, the men would choose a barley field at random and bind some of the best sheaves, leaving them standing. The following evening three men would go out to that field with sickles and baskets to reap those specifically prepared sheaves. As onlookers (including the children) gathered to observe the ceremony, the reapers would ask the crowd certain traditional questions. Year by year the children saw that ritual and heard the answers. The barley was cut and taken to the temple court, where it was threshed and winnowed. Some of it was mixed with oil and incense and used as an offering. The remainder went to the priests.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FormalEducation\">Formal Education<\/p>\n<p>Jewish education during the biblical period helped Jews to know of the Law, study the history of the Jewish people, and become proficient in reading, writing, and a certain amount of arithmetic. To that, incidental information such as the medicinal value of certain herbs (see 1 Kgs 4:33) might sometimes be added.<\/p>\n<h5>Teachers<\/h5>\n<p>Priests instructed the people in the knowledge of God. As officers of the synagogue, the Levites also performed a teaching role (cf. Dt 33:10; 2 Chr 35:3). Before the exile, the prophets assumed the role of instructors, teaching the historical heritage of the people and acting as critics of injustice and improper social behavior. Their responsibility was to interpret the law for contemporary society. By the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, the prophets’ role as instructors had passed to the scribes and to others designated as teachers.<\/p>\n<p>In the centuries before Christ, scribes not only transcribed and preserved the traditions in written form but were students and interpreters of the law. The scribes were known as “doctors of the law” (Lk 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), lawyers (Mt 22:35), and rabbis (23:8). All higher education was in their hands, and they developed a complex system of instruction known as “the tradition of the elders” (15:2-6). Although the scribes needed leisure for their scholarly pursuits, they did not despise laborers. Most of them, in fact, practiced a trade as a means of support when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>Although the scribes were influential in the time of Christ (Mt 23:1-2), they undoubtedly found, like the prophets before them, that their words were not always heeded. The scribes, who exercised an important influence over contemporary life and morals, were notable for their fierce opposition to Jesus (Mk 2:6) and to the early church (Acts 4:5; 6:12).<\/p>\n<p>By the NT era, the entire community was expected to establish and maintain elementary schools. The community was also responsible for financing the education of poor or orphaned children. Out of high regard for earlier priests, prophets, and scribes, and because of the eminent position given to education, teachers were highly esteemed by the Jewish people. Because God had given them the law, it was of greatest importance. One who worked as God’s servant expounding the law was therefore the most important person in the community. To be a teacher was life’s highest privilege and the most significant task a man could perform.<\/p>\n<p>Teachers were expected to demonstrate exceptional character along with their academic qualifications. They were expected to keep children from having contact with anything harmful. They were not to show bitterness or give preference to one child over another. Rather than threatening, they were to explain right and wrong and the harmfulness of sin. Teachers were expected to keep promises to children lest the students grow accustomed to broken words and lies. Teachers were to be eventempered, never impatient or lacking in understanding, always prepared to repeat explanations. It was said that children should be treated like young heifers, with their burdens increased daily. Yet any teacher who was too severe was dismissed.<\/p>\n<h5>Subject Matter<\/h5>\n<p>Early education consisted of learning the law through listening and oral repetition, along with the study of the written text. The content of the law covered three main areas: ceremonial, civil, and criminal. Students needed to master these, preparing themselves to take responsibility for observing the law as adults.<\/p>\n<p>The Scriptures contained such a variety of writings that pupils learned about religion, history, law, morals, and manners, plus reading, writing, and arithmetic. They studied from great literature; along with the Law, they used the books of Psalms, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes extensively as texts. The Dead Sea Scrolls have shown that some classical Hebrew was still being spoken in NT times. Students who commonly spoke Aramaic or Greek were faced with a difficult situation when learning the Hebrew of the OT. The problem was especially complex because the Hebrew was written without any vowel sounds. Those had to be memorized in association with the consonants of the text.<\/p>\n<p>Since the ancient Hebrews were generally regarded as the most proficient musicians and singers in the Near East, it is probable that basic instruction in singing and playing instruments, such as the pipe and harp, was received at home. Although no Hebrew hymns have survived in musical form, temple singers would almost certainly have been familiar with the kind of music theory known among the Canaanites. (A musical text recovered from Ugarit [Ras Shamra] consisted of a ballad or a hymn inscribed on clay with curious musical symbols that long defied identification. Dating to perhaps 1800 <span>BC<\/span>, that Canaanite text has been described as the “oldest sheet music in the world.”)<\/p>\n<p>During the exile especially, great emphasis was placed on recording and preserving ancient customs and ceremonies in order to maintain the distinctiveness of Hebrew culture. The captives recognized the importance of keeping alive their national heritage and the Law during the years they were living in an alien culture.<\/p>\n<p>The synagogue developed during the exile as a place for the study of religion and for prayer, becoming the center of instruction in the Jewish faith. Previously, the temple at Jerusalem had been the only place for sacrifice. Because that ritual could not be performed in Babylon, it was natural for the synagogue to increase in importance in worship as well as in education.<\/p>\n<p>The exile brought about fundamental changes in Jewish life in areas other than the purely religious. Education received considerable stimulation from the Jewish exiles’ contact with the more sophisticated culture of the Babylonians. The Babylonian law code was a precise and well-established feature of life. Schools and libraries in Babylonia had been in existence for many centuries. Mesopotamian knowledge of medicine, astronomy, mathematics, architecture, and engineering was far superior to that of the Jews. In that intellectual environment the literature of the Jews took on new meaning; it was from that period that the books of Ezekiel and Daniel emerged.<\/p>\n<p>In the postexilic period, teaching was based extensively on Proverbs and the apocryphal books of Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon. From those works the Jews received practical training for a successful life. The scribes taught that wisdom came from God and that those who obeyed the commandments would bring joy and honor to others.<\/p>\n<p>Under Persian rule in the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the Jews had been encouraged to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple. After 332 <span>BC<\/span>, when Alexander the Great defeated the Persian king Darius, strong efforts were made to Hellenize the conquered peoples. The Greek language was introduced along with Greek religion, political procedures, and educational methods. The drive for Hellenization continued under the rule of the Ptolemies (a Macedonian family line that ruled Egypt) and the Seleucids (a Syrian dynasty). Coincident with the establishment of foreign rule came the dominance of the Jewish priesthood in Judean political matters. Greek influence was seen in the enriched aesthetic appreciation typical of certain Jewish rulers.<\/p>\n<p>Although Greek philosophy and sports remained outside the realm of Jewish education, there was a noticeable decline in Jewish religious and moral standards in the Hellenistic period. Some Jews were eager to obtain advancement from the foreign masters by adopting the Greek culture. Others fought desperately to preserve their Jewish heritage. During Roman times, the foreign influence was again ignored by faithful Jews whenever possible.<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching Methods<\/h5>\n<p>Teaching methods, developed from memorizing the Law, stressed the importance of retention and recollection. Children were taught to memorize as soon as they could talk, and they were trained to repeat the exact words so that no nuance of meaning would be altered. The alphabet was taught and memorized by being repeatedly written and drilled. Students copied and recopied passages from the written Law in precise, neat handwriting. Any piece of writing containing a mistake was considered dangerous, since it might imprint the wrong word or spelling on the learner’s mind. Reading aloud was recommended as an aid to memorization.<\/p>\n<p>To aid learning, each boy was also given a personal text beginning with the first letter of his name and ending with the last. As soon as he demonstrated his ability to read, he received a scroll that contained the first words of Deuteronomy 6:4: “Hear, O Israel: The <span>Lord<\/span> our God is one <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>rsv<\/span>). That was recited every morning and evening in postexilic times, along with the Hallel (or psalm of praise), the story of Creation, and the main part of the Law contained in Leviticus.<\/p>\n<p>Teachings also came in the form of proverbs or parables, a device later used by Jesus (Mk 4:1-2). An open sharing of knowledge occurred in question-and-answer periods (for example, the visit of the 12-year-old Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem, Lk 2:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>Very little information is available on education in the early Christian era. We know that Jesus could read and expound the Scriptures and was knowledgeable enough to discuss theology with the learned men in the temple. He probably learned at home and received the elementary education common to most Jewish boys at that period.<\/p>\n<h5>Discipline<\/h5>\n<p>Discipline, almost always an important element in education, was important to the ancient Hebrews. A system of reward and punishment was used in which corporal chastisement was normal. Punishment was considered to be an outward symbol of God’s love and concern for the instruction of his people (Ps 94:8-13), although the Jews as a people did not always learn from those corrections (Jer 5:3; Am 4:6-13). A child was thought to need “breaking” like a horse: “A horse that is untamed turns out to be stubborn, and a son unrestrained turns out to be wilful” (Ecclus 30:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Adult Education<\/h5>\n<p>When Ezra the scribe returned from Babylon with a copy of the Book of the Law, he taught it to the Levites and to the people. That material, together with the book of Proverbs and literature from the preexilic and exilic periods, became basic in Jewish education. In the postexilic period, priests traveled to the towns, addressing people in the synagogue on the Sabbath and in the square on market days, when a large crowd would be gathered. Some individuals may have extended their learning through discussion with the elders (cf. Ez 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>For those who continued their education, the next phase was probably instruction by scribes. The scribes, leaders of a Jewish sect called Pharisees, had developed Ezra’s principles into strict rules on tithing, ritual purity, and synagogue worship. As a young man, Saul of Tarsus came to Jerusalem to study with Gamaliel, an honored rabbi (Acts 22:3). At that time the curriculum was an advanced study of theological law, both written and oral, along with the rites and ceremonies of Jewish culture.<\/p>\n<h5>School Buildings<\/h5>\n<p>By NT times, some schools operated in special buildings and others in the teachers’ own houses, but most were attached to the synagogue. When a separate building was designed, it was considered inadvisable to construct it in a crowded area. In a large town the community was expected to provide two schools, especially if a river divided the town. A school did not operate in the heat of the day (between 10 <span>am<\/span> and 3 <span>pm<\/span>), and would meet only four hours a day in July and August. Class size was expected to be 25, with a teacher and an assistant for 40 students and two teachers for 50. At school the boys sat on the ground at the teacher’s feet and learned from the Scriptures. Thus, the school became known as the “House of the Book.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiteracyamongtheJews\">Literacy among the Jews<\/p>\n<p>The extent of literacy among Jews over the centuries is difficult to determine, but indications can be found from specific examples. The book of Joshua describes three men chosen from each tribe who had to prepare a written report about the land of Canaan (Jos 18:4-9). Later, Gideon captured a youth who was able to make a written list of the important men of the city (Jgs 8:14). Writing was probably a common skill since the Israelites were exhorted to use it frequently (Dt 6:9; 27:2-8). Simple mathematical terms could be written and understood by boys, and there are indications of familiarity with the geometrical relationship of a circle’s radius and circumference (the concept of pi; see 2 Chr 4:2). The development of cursive script implies widespread use of writing from at least the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>. It is noteworthy that a synagogue service could be performed by any ten men in the congregation, which presupposes that there were more than 10 men in any synagogue who were literate enough to fulfill that duty.<\/p>\n<p>When fears of Hellenism were strong and the existence of Judaism was threatened in the first century <span>BC<\/span>, it was decreed that every Jewish boy should attend elementary school. Since such a system probably already existed, that decree merely made attendance compulsory for all males up to 16 or 17 years of age. No doubt the reason was that thorough knowledge and careful observance of the Law were vital to the survival of the Jewish heritage.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua ben-Gamala (high priest <span>AD<\/span> 63–65) is considered the founder of universal education. His instructions for setting up schools in towns and villages were precise, requiring attendance of boys from the age of six or seven years. The community was responsible for setting up a school and maintaining a teacher in any town where there were at least ten Jewish families. Fathers were required to see that their sons attended school. When a family lived in an isolated area, a teacher often lived with the family. Teachers were probably paid either by the family or from a community tax, although scribes were not paid directly for the instruction they gave. It is difficult to know if the goal of universal elementary education was attained.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EducationinSurroundingCultures\">Education in Surrounding Cultures<\/p>\n<p>The theological emphasis of Hebrew education contrasted sharply with the aims of education in Greece and Rome. Those societies, however, were also concerned with developing a particular type of character.<\/p>\n<p>In Sparta the purpose of educational training was to develop young men to be fighters who would subject themselves to the welfare of the state. Character development was achieved by eliminating luxuries and by systematically disciplining mind and body through physical activity. Survival techniques encouraged resourcefulness and initiative. Girls received the same education, since it was considered important to develop women who could give birth to strong warriors.<\/p>\n<p>In Athens education was deemed essential to life. Because transmission of culture would enable boys to become perfect citizens, they were taught letters, music, morals and manners, mathematics, and gymnastics (development of a healthy body). Education was ideally a noble pursuit—a training of the mind, the birthright of every citizen—but in practice it was restricted to a small section of the aristocracy. The educated despised earning a living as a way of life suitable only for slaves. Women received no education. The teacher in elementary schools was a lowly individual.<\/p>\n<p>Roman education prepared a boy mentally and physically for farm, battlefield, or wherever his services were required by the state. Education was a family responsibility—the boy learning first from his mother, then from his father. Basic reading, writing, arithmetic, language, structure, and debating skills were taught, sometimes by private tutors. When schools were developed, they seem to have been noisy, storefront activities operated by poorly paid teachers. Girls were taught housekeeping skills at home.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian boys attended the “House of the Books” for their studies and learned reading and elementary arithmetic. Writing in hieroglyphs on papyrus was the most difficult task. Like students in other cultures, boys were subject to corporal punishment. Egyptian teachers considered that “a boy’s ears are in his back,” following up that conviction with frequent use of a cane.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EDUCATION The act or process of educating or being educated. The original purpose of Jewish education was to teach children to know and understand their special relationship with God, to teach them to serve him, and to educate them in holiness. Later Jewish education included character development and the history of God’s people (particularly through rehearsing his acts of deliverance). Because of that education, the Jews knew the Mosaic law and their own history, and so, during periods of su...","summary_en":"EDUCATION The act or process of educating or being educated. The original purpose of Jewish education was to teach children to know and understand their special relationship with God, to teach them to serve him, and to educate them in holiness. Later Jewish education included character development and the history of God’s people (particularly through rehearsing his acts of deliverance). Because of that education, the Jews knew the Mosaic law and their own history, and so, during periods of su...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15674,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heart","title_en":"Heart","content_ro":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEART<\/h3>\n<p>Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being.<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">leb<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kardia<\/span>) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhysicalHeart\">Physical Heart<\/p>\n<p>That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physical food and wine affect the heart (Jgs 19:5; Ps 104:15; Acts 14:17), and the heart can “faint” and “tremble.” The heart’s position in the body yields an obvious metaphor for “the center” (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PyschologicalHeart\">Pyschological Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart attends intellectually (e.g., Jer 12:11); it also perceives (Jn 12:40), understands (1 Kgs 3:9), debates (Mk 2:6), reflects (Lk 2:19), remembers (Lk 2:51), thinks (Dt 8:17), imagines (Lk 1:51), is wise (Eccl 1:17, <span>kjv<\/span>), has technical skill (Ex 28:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Emotionally, the heart experiences intoxicated merriment (1 Sm 25:36), gladness (Is 30:29), joy (Jn 16:22), sorrow (Neh 2:2), anguish (Rom 9:2), bitterness (Prv 14:10), anxiety (1 Sm 4:13), despair (Eccl 2:20), love (2 Sm 14:1), trust (Ps 112:7), affection (2 Cor 7:3), lust (Mt 5:28), callousness (Mk 3:5), hatred (Lv 19:17), fear (Gn 42:28), jealousy (Jas 3:14), desire (Rom 10:1), discouragement (Nm 32:9), sympathy (Ex 23:9), anger (Dt 19:6, <span>kjv<\/span>), irresolution (2 Chr 13:7, <span>kjv<\/span>), and much more.<\/p>\n<p>Volitionally, the heart can purpose (1 Cor 4:5), incline to (1 Sm 14:7), prompt (2 Kgs 12:4; cf. Prv 4:23), be steadfast (Acts 11:23), be willing (Ex 35:22), contrive evil (Acts 5:4), or follow its “treasure” (Mt 6:21).<\/p>\n<p>Morally, the heart can be gentle, lowly (Mt 11:29), holy (1 Thes 3:13), faithful (Neh 9:8), upright (Ps 97:11), pure, single-minded (Jas 4:8), clean (Acts 15:8), loving toward God (Mk 12:30) and others (1 Pt 1:22), hardened, or sensitive (Ez 11:19). Scripture’s emphasis falls upon the heart’s evil (Gn 6:5 and throughout), as self-deceiving (Jas 1:26), deceitful (Jer 17:9), avaricious (Mt 6:19-21), lustful (Mt 5:28), arrogant (Is 9:9), impious (Acts 7:51), perverse (Ps 101:4), and impenitent (Rom 2:5). Nothing defiles a man worse than his own heart (Mk 7:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of the heart can come good (Lk 6:45; 8:15). Even when frustrated by circumstances or by fear, the heart’s good intention remains good; its evil intent, bad (1 Kgs 8:18; Mt 5:28).<\/p>\n<p>Being so complex, a person’s heart is sadly divided, and Scripture often extols a perfect, whole, true (i.e., united) heart (Gn 20:5; Ps 86:11; Acts 8:37). The “heart” signifies the total inner self, a person’s hidden core of being (1 Pt 3:4), with which one communes, which one “pours out” in prayer, words, and deeds (Ps 62:8; Mt 15:18-19). It is the genuine self, distinguished from appearance, public position, and physical presence (1 Sm 16:7; 2 Cor 5:12; 1 Thes 2:17). And this “heart-self” has its own nature, character, and disposition (Dn 4:16; 7:4, <span>kjv<\/span>; cf. Mt 12:33-37).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSpiritualHeart\">The Spiritual Heart<\/p>\n<p>The heart is especially important in biblical religion. The mystery of the hidden self is fully known to God and to Christ (Jer 17:10; Lk 9:47; Rom 8:27), and the heart is the seat of our knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:6). The state of heart governs the vision of God (Mt 5:8); from the heart one speaks to God (Ps 27:8); the heart is the locus of divine indwelling (2 Cor 1:22; Gal 4:6; Eph 3:17).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, moral evil in the heart is seen in biblical perspective as sin against God. Senseless hearts are darkened, often secretly idolatrous, far from God, “not right” before God (Dt 29:18-19; Mt 15:8; Acts 8:21; Rom 1:21). Yet the Lord will not despise a broken, contrite heart (Ps 51:17). When one’s heart is turned toward God, he promises to make it sensitive to divine things, renewed and purified (Dt 4:29; 2 Kgs 23:25; Ps 51:10; Jl 2:13; Ez 36:25-27). God’s law shall then be written on the heart as the inward guide and incentive (Jer 31:33; Heb 8:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>In Christian terms, such transformation involves believing the gospel from the “honest and good heart” that provides fruitful soil for the Word of God (Lk 8:15; Rom 10:9). The true heart draws near to God, loves him with all its intellect, feeling, and will (Lk 10:27; Heb 10:22). Then God gives strength, reward, renewal, grace, peace, and joy to the heart (Ps 73:26; Is 57:15; Acts 2:46; Phil 4:7; Heb 13:9). So the ancient ideal becomes possible again, that of being “a man after God’s own heart” (1 Sm 13:14; Acts 13:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","summary_en":"HEART Vital bodily organ; emotional center of one’s being. In Hebrew and Greek, as in modern English, “heart” is used to designate a physical organ as well as the emotional center of one’s being. “Heart” (Hebrew leb; Greek kardia) occurs approximately 1,000 times in the Bible, though it is often disguised in translation. The range of meaning is great. Physical Heart That the beating heart indicates life seems implied in 1 Samuel 25:37-39 (see nlt mg), despite the delay in Nabal’s death. Physi...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55170,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","summary_en":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82796,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","summary_en":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110422,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","summary_en":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138048,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:6-7<\/strong> <em>Only God can forgive sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","summary_en":"2:6-7 Only God can forgive sins, yet Jesus had authority to do so (2:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":5188,"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":12710,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":55171,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","summary_en":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82797,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","summary_en":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110423,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","summary_en":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138049,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:9-11<\/strong> It is <em>easier to say<\/em> . . . <em>your sins are forgiven<\/em> because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","summary_en":"2:9-11 It is easier to say . . . your sins are forgiven because this claim cannot be directly proved or disproved, while the claim to heal can be. Jesus showed his ability to heal in order to show his authority to forgive.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":15624,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Healing Heal","title_en":"Healing Heal","content_ro":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAL, HEALING<\/h3>\n<p>To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal relationship with himself. In a similar manner, Deuteronomy 32:39 speaks of God as the one who heals. The context in Deuteronomy implies that this healing power derives from the fact that God is God. This concept of God as the healer is echoed throughout the OT by the psalmists (Pss 6:2; 41:4; 103:3) and prophets (Is 19:22; Jer 17:14; Hos 7:1; Zec 11:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesustheHealerAccountsintheGospels\">Jesus the Healer: Accounts in the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>The NT significantly emphasizes Jesus as the healer. Mark portrays him as a teacher and healer in his opening account of Jesus’ ministry in Capernaum with the healing of the demoniac, Peter’s mother-in-law, the sick brought to him in the evening, and the leper (Mk 1:21-45). Indeed, healing sickness and casting out demons characterize Jesus’ ministry. Mark presents in rapid succession Jesus’ healing of the paralytic (2:1-12), the man with the withered hand (3:1-6), the multitudes by the sea (vv 7-12), the Gerasene demoniac (5:1-20), the woman with a hemorrhage, and Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). Jesus then commissioned the Twelve to proclaim repentance, to cast out demons, and to heal the sick (6:7-13). He himself continued with healings at Gennesaret (vv 53-56), casting out the unclean spirit from the daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (7:24-30), healing the deaf and mute man (vv 31-37), the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26), the boy possessed with an evil spirit (9:14-20), and blind Bartimaeus (10:46-52).<\/p>\n<p>Certainly healing is an important aspect of Jesus’ ministry. The healings expressed not only his compassion for those suffering but also constituted a revelation of his person. This is brought out by the climactic statement of Jesus in healing the paralytic: “that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mk 2:10, <span>rsv<\/span>). It also seems that Mark intended his readers to understand that the healing of the deaf and mute man (7:31-37) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26) symbolize the awakening of spiritual understanding in the disciples of who Jesus is. It is also significant that Mark has placed the healing of Bartimaeus (10:46-52) immediately after Jesus’ third announcement of his own coming death (vv 32-34) and the disciples’ third failure to understand that his being the Messiah entailed the necessity of suffering (vv 35-45).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew also portrays Jesus as teaching, preaching, and healing (Mt 4:23-25), and parallels the accounts in Mark, except for the healing of the demoniac in the synagogue (Mk 1:23-28) and the blind man of Bethsaida (8:22-26). However, according to his special purpose and structure, Matthew has placed many of Jesus’ healings together in a “mighty works” section (Mt 8–9), complementing the “great words” (“sermon”) section (chs 5–7). Matthew views Jesus’ healings as directly fulfilling the OT, as he states in 8:17. The unique way in which the healings of 8:16 are spoken of as fulfilling Isaiah 53:4 seems to indicate that Jesus’ power over sickness derives in some way from his death for sin, which was to be accomplished at the end of his ministry.<\/p>\n<p>It is also interesting that Matthew, in relating Jesus’ healing of the multitudes by the sea (Mt 12:15-21; cf. Mk 3:7-12), cites Isaiah 42:1-4. This OT passage speaks of God’s servant anointed with the Spirit to proclaim justice to the nations. As used by Matthew, the quotation explains why Jesus commanded those healed not to make him known. Jesus did not want too much publicity about himself to thwart God’s plan for him as the Suffering Servant who was to bring salvation to the nations. This action demonstrates that Jesus’ healings are revelations of his person. Again another quotation from Isaiah (6:9-10) in Matthew 13:14-15 brings out the fact that healing is understood primarily in the spiritual sense of hearing Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>Luke, like Matthew and Mark, portrays Jesus preaching and healing. After the account of the birth of John and Jesus and the ministry of John the Baptist, Luke presents Jesus preaching in Nazareth (Lk 4:16-30). Here, in the synagogue of his hometown, Jesus himself, using a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, affirms that the Spirit has anointed him to proclaim good news and to announce release for the captives and a recovery of sight for the blind (Lk 4:18). The healing aspect of Jesus’ ministry occupies an important place in the rest of the book of Luke. Indeed, Luke has all the healing incidents noted by Mark, except for those in Mark 6:45–8:26. However, Luke’s opening scene in Nazareth seems to underscore that Jesus’ healing is to be understood, not as merely expressing Jesus’ compassion for the needy, but primarily as a sign of the arrival of the kingdom of God as promised in the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis may be seen in the distinctively Lukan account of the commissioning of the 72 disciples (Lk 10:1-12), where Jesus instructs them to heal the sick in any city they enter and announce to the people there that the kingdom of God has come near to them (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The first three Gospels take up the OT understanding of God as the healer of his people and see this as fulfilled in Jesus. This fulfillment signifies the presence of God’s reign in the ministry of Jesus and points to him as the one through whom God is at work in the midst of his people.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel has only four healing incidents: the official’s son (Jn 4:46-54), the man ill for 38 years (5:1-18), the man born blind (ch 9), and the climactic raising of Lazarus (11:1-44). The special purpose and structure of this Gospel indicate that these incidents are carefully related to the accompanying discourses and are clearly intended as signs revealing the person of Jesus. The heightened emphasis on healings as revelatory signs in this Gospel confirms the similar intention in the first three Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsDonebytheApostles\">Healings Done by the Apostles<\/p>\n<p>The Acts of the Apostles tells of the continuation of Jesus’ ministry through the Spirit at work in his disciples. The primary focus in Acts is on proclamation, as 1:8 indicates. However, the healing of the lame beggar in Jerusalem indicates that the disciples were able to exercise the power of healing in the name of Jesus (3:1-16; 4:8-16). The healing is clearly intended to point to and glorify the person of Jesus and lead to faith in him (3:12-26). The balanced, twofold ministry of the disciples may be seen in the prayer of 4:29-30: “O Lord, hear their threats, and give your servants great boldness in their preaching. Send your healing power; may miraculous signs and wonders be done through the name of your holy servant Jesus” (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of Philip in Samaria was devoted to proclaiming Christ (Acts 8:5) and healing the sick and those with unclean spirits (v 7). Peter heals Aeneas and raises Tabitha (9:34, 40), and in each case the effects are that many believe in the Lord (vv 35, 42). Paul is also described as preaching the gospel (17:2-3), healing (14:8-11; 28:8), casting out spirits (16:18), and raising a dead man (20:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HealingsintheChurchAge\">Healings in the Church Age<\/p>\n<p>The letters of the NT say little about healing. First Corinthians speaks of the gifts of healing (1 Cor 12:9, 28). The implication is that such gifts are intended to be part of the ministry of the church, but the context indicates that not all are given such gifts (v 30) and that it is God who sovereignly distributes gifts for the good of the body. James indicates that a believer who is ill should request the church to pray for his healing (Jas 5:14-16; cf. Heb 12:13). The clear implication is that God is willing and able to minister to his people for healing today.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","summary_en":"HEAL, HEALING To make well. The OT provides the proper background for a Christian understanding of the concept of healing. In the OT the basic point is made that God is the healer of his people. In Exodus 15:22-26, after God has delivered his people from Egypt, led them through the sea, and sweetened the water at Marah, he speaks of himself as their “healer.” This refers primarily to physical sustenance, but it points to the more encompassing concept of God sustaining his people in an eternal...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19611,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31384,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Powers*, Principalities","title_en":"and Powers*, Principalities","content_ro":"<h3>PRINCIPALITIES AND POWERS*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase familiarized by the <span>kjv<\/span>, occurring several times in Paul’s writings, and expressed by means of three Greek synonyms. The concept of principalities is signified by <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">exousia<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">archai<\/span><em>,<\/em> while powers is represented by <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span><em>.<\/em> In the NT, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">exousia<\/span> describes the power inherent in authority as something confirmed by or derived from a position of prominence. There is nothing evil about this kind of authority; on the contrary, it is essentially right both morally and spiritually (Mt 21:23). It thus applies most appropriately to the authority of the Messiah (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10), of the apostles (2 Cor 10:8; 13:10), and of human government (cf. Mt 8:9; Lk 20:20). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Archai<\/span> has several meanings but occurs 12 times in the sense of “command,” “rule,” or “sovereignty,” 9 of which (Rom 8:38; 1 Cor 15:24; Eph 1:21; 3:10; 6:12; Col 1:16; 2:10, 15; Ti 3:1) appear in Paul’s letters. Finally <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span><em>,<\/em> a common word for power, denotes the ability or strength to achieve an impressive goal (Mt 25:15; Acts 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>By using the expression “principalities and powers,” Paul was referring to the hierarchy of supernatural agencies, such as angelic beings, who worship and serve the Creator of the universe. Some commentators have divided this hierarchy into five categories, namely thrones, principalities, powers, authorities, and dominions. This categorization, however, can be arrived at only by general inference, since there is nothing in Scripture that points directly to such distinct groups. In using the phrase, Paul was probably expressing the cosmic lordship of Jesus in as colorful and dramatic a manner as possible.<\/p>\n<p>In giving Jesus a name above every other name, Paul was demonstrating the supreme lordship of Christ over all created beings, whether good or bad (Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). As their Creator, the heavenly hosts were his subjects, acknowledging him as Lord of the universe. This affirmation was important for the Colossians, whose theology had apparently been tainted by unbiblical speculation (Col 2:8). The truth is that in Jesus there resided all the fullness of God, and this is transmitted to believers through the Lord’s Spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRINCIPALITIES AND POWERS*<\/h3>\n<p>Phrase familiarized by the <span>kjv<\/span>, occurring several times in Paul’s writings, and expressed by means of three Greek synonyms. The concept of principalities is signified by <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">exousia<\/span> and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">archai<\/span><em>,<\/em> while powers is represented by <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span><em>.<\/em> In the NT, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">exousia<\/span> describes the power inherent in authority as something confirmed by or derived from a position of prominence. There is nothing evil about this kind of authority; on the contrary, it is essentially right both morally and spiritually (Mt 21:23). It thus applies most appropriately to the authority of the Messiah (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10), of the apostles (2 Cor 10:8; 13:10), and of human government (cf. Mt 8:9; Lk 20:20). <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Archai<\/span> has several meanings but occurs 12 times in the sense of “command,” “rule,” or “sovereignty,” 9 of which (Rom 8:38; 1 Cor 15:24; Eph 1:21; 3:10; 6:12; Col 1:16; 2:10, 15; Ti 3:1) appear in Paul’s letters. Finally <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">dunamis<\/span><em>,<\/em> a common word for power, denotes the ability or strength to achieve an impressive goal (Mt 25:15; Acts 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>By using the expression “principalities and powers,” Paul was referring to the hierarchy of supernatural agencies, such as angelic beings, who worship and serve the Creator of the universe. Some commentators have divided this hierarchy into five categories, namely thrones, principalities, powers, authorities, and dominions. This categorization, however, can be arrived at only by general inference, since there is nothing in Scripture that points directly to such distinct groups. In using the phrase, Paul was probably expressing the cosmic lordship of Jesus in as colorful and dramatic a manner as possible.<\/p>\n<p>In giving Jesus a name above every other name, Paul was demonstrating the supreme lordship of Christ over all created beings, whether good or bad (Rom 14:11; Phil 2:10). As their Creator, the heavenly hosts were his subjects, acknowledging him as Lord of the universe. This affirmation was important for the Colossians, whose theology had apparently been tainted by unbiblical speculation (Col 2:8). The truth is that in Jesus there resided all the fullness of God, and this is transmitted to believers through the Lord’s Spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRINCIPALITIES AND POWERS* Phrase familiarized by the kjv, occurring several times in Paul’s writings, and expressed by means of three Greek synonyms. The concept of principalities is signified by exousia and archai, while powers is represented by dunamis. In the NT, exousia describes the power inherent in authority as something confirmed by or derived from a position of prominence. There is nothing evil about this kind of authority; on the contrary, it is essentially right both morally and s...","summary_en":"PRINCIPALITIES AND POWERS* Phrase familiarized by the kjv, occurring several times in Paul’s writings, and expressed by means of three Greek synonyms. The concept of principalities is signified by exousia and archai, while powers is represented by dunamis. In the NT, exousia describes the power inherent in authority as something confirmed by or derived from a position of prominence. There is nothing evil about this kind of authority; on the contrary, it is essentially right both morally and s...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35856,"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":64982,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65505,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92608,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93131,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120234,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120757,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147860,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148383,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":24325,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Mark","title_en":"Gospel of Mark","content_ro":"<h3>MARK, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 60 and 68.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorDateProvenance\">Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, although this is by no means certain). At one point Papias states, “The Elder used to say this also: Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that [Peter] remembered concerning the things both said and done by the Lord.” (This quotation was preserved by the fourth-century writer Eusebius of Caesarea in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.39.15.) One need not doubt the basic reliability of this statement. Mark—almost surely to be identified with the John Mark of Acts 12:12 (see also 1 Pt 5:13)—was a disciple of Peter, and the second Gospel owes its existence, at least in part, to the apostle’s reminiscences. It does not follow, however, that one has adequately characterized Mark’s work if that is all one says. For instance, Papias’s qualification, “though not in order,” indicates that Mark did not intend to write a chronological biography. Furthermore, Papias goes on to comment (according to one interpretation of his ambiguous words) that Mark (or Peter?) adapted the material to the teaching situation and that therefore Mark is absolved from any (implied) charges of inaccuracy. It appears that from the earliest times Christians appealed to the purposes and circumstances of Mark’s writing in order to account for difficulties in harmonizing the material found in the various Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Other statements from Christian writers in the second, third, and fourth centuries seem dependent on Papias’s testimony, but some additional data they provide may possess independent value. For example, a fairly early document (date uncertain) known as the Anti-Marcionite Prologue asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel somewhere in Italy after Peter’s death (in the mid-60s), and this testimony is considered reliable by many scholars. Still, the possibility that Mark composed his work before Peter’s martyrdom cannot be ruled out completely.<\/p>\n<p>Papias says nothing specific about <em>when<\/em> the Gospel was written. A small minority of scholars date Mark shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Another minority suggest a date in the 40s or 50s on the basis of a papyrus fragment discovered in Qumran called 7Q5. (According to José O’Callaghan, the fragment, which has been dated about <span>AD<\/span> 50–68, should be identified as Mark 6:52-53.) This fragment contains only 20 letters on one side, making the Markan reconstruction very uncertain. Few scholars are convinced that the text is Mark; some think it is part of 1 Enoch or Zechariah. An impressive majority of scholars date Mark in the 60s, with conservatives usually preferring the early years of the decade. Why this preference? If the theory of Markan priority is accepted, then clearly Mark was written before Luke; and since Luke is normally dated by conservatives about <span>AD<\/span> 62, Mark can be no later than <span>AD<\/span> 60 or 61. This line of argument, though strong, is not decisive. In the first place, Luke cannot be dated with complete certainty. Second, the view that Matthew and Luke used Mark (the working assumption of most scholars) is only a hypothesis, and one that is vigorously opposed by some writers. Third, a tradition going back to the second century (see above) asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel <em>after<\/em> Peter’s death, no earlier than <span>AD<\/span> 64. Fourth, one persuasive view regarding the occasion of this Gospel assumes that the Neronian persecution (<span>AD<\/span> 64) had begun. (According to a different view of the occasion, Mark was written after the beginning of the Jewish revolt in <span>AD<\/span> 66.) Therefore, while a date in the early 60s remains possible, it does not require committal.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the authorship of the second Gospel, there seems to be no compelling reason to deny Papias’s report that Mark (no doubt the John Mark of Acts 12:12) took down Peter’s reminiscences and that these became the basis of his work. Some scholars argue that the Gospel contains geographical inaccuracies (e.g., we have no evidence of a region called Dalmanutha, Mk 8:10) and that a native of Jerusalem such as Mark would have been more reliable in his information. However, the topographical problems in Mark, though real, need not be interpreted as inaccuracies (present ignorance of a place named Dalmanutha is hardly conclusive proof that it did not exist). Furthermore, in other respects (e.g., 14:54, 66) the Gospel reveals an impressive knowledge of local details. Many writers also point out bits of information that support a Petrine background, such as the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (1:30-31). In short, the internal evidence, while falling short of proof, does not at all undermine the tradition preserved by Papias. A generation ago, the trustworthiness of Papias’s testimony was almost universally accepted. This situation has changed somewhat, but even those scholars who adopt a skeptical attitude toward this tradition concede that it <em>may<\/em> be true.<\/p>\n<p>As attention turns to the provenance of the Gospel, the task becomes more difficult. Tradition going back to the second century asserts what may be already implied by Papias—namely, that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome. Although some scholars have suggested other possibilities, such as Galilee and Antioch, these have not proved satisfactory. Mark did spend some time in Rome, and some characteristics in the Gospel (such as Latinisms in the Greek and the explanation of Jewish customs, as in 7:3-4), while proving nothing, are certainly consonant with a Roman origin. Furthermore, one persuasive view of the occasion that gave rise to the Gospel assumes a background of persecution in Rome.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Distinctives\">Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>A number of characteristics of Mark set it apart from the other Gospels. For example, a word usually translated “immediately” occurs more than 40 times in Mark and only a dozen times in the rest of the NT. While this feature could be interpreted as a simple “mannerism,” consonant with Mark’s unpretentious, colloquial style, it certainly adds to the rapid flow of his narrative, which, dwelling more on Jesus’ activity than on his discourses (in contrast to Matthew and Luke), shifts from scene to scene with hardly a pause. Since the Gospel is also quite brief (Luke is nearly twice as long), one may wonder whether the author intended for it to be read at a sitting; even if read aloud, this would take only about one and a half hours. At any rate, there can be little doubt that the work conveys a sense of urgency.<\/p>\n<p>Other characteristics, however, prove more significant. Someone unfamiliar with the story of Jesus who happened to read Mark for the first time would no doubt be taken aback by its rather abrupt beginning. After a brief clause that stands as a sort of title (1:1), Mark moves on to describe in brief the ministry of John the Baptist. Then he introduces Jesus as coming from Nazareth without telling us anything whatever of his earlier life. Furthermore, over one-third of the book (including the so-called Passion narrative) is devoted to Jesus’ last week. These and other factors lend to the work a note of mystery, accentuated by the fact that at various points Mark calls attention to the fear or amazement gripping those who came in contact with Jesus (2:12; 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6; and several other passages, especially the strange words of 10:32). In addition, if one assumes that the Gospel originally ended with 16:8, Mark wished to leave his readers with the same sense of awe that the disciples experienced at Jesus’ resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>But how does one account for this fear and amazement? Mark’s clear answer is that Jesus, though truly a man, is also divine. While Mark’s Gospel exhibits the humanity of Jesus Christ (1:41; 3:5; 8:12; 10:14), his chief emphasis is on the Lord’s deity. Indeed, Mark introduces his book by referring to Jesus as “the Son of God” (a phrase omitted in some manuscripts, however), a position that is recognized both by the demons (3:11; 5:7) and by God himself (9:7). What may well be the true climax of the Gospel occurs at 15:39, where Mark writes that a Gentile, a Roman centurion, upon hearing Jesus’ death cry, exclaimed, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The author organized his Gospel according to a simple plan. The first eight chapters summarize the nature of Christ’s public ministry by alternating stories that show his growing popularity with stories that stress the disapproval of the Jewish leaders. This first half of the book, while indicating some of the tensions created by Jesus’ coming, gives the basic impression of success and general optimism. A significant shift then strikes the reader toward the end of chapter 8, particularly beginning with verse 31. At Caesarea Philippi, Peter has just confessed that Jesus is the Messiah, and now for the first time Jesus reveals that as Messiah he must die. The disciples become perplexed and discouraged and their pessimism mounts as this thought is brought home to them repeatedly (9:9, 31; 10:32-34; 14:17-25). In the end they desert their master (14:50).<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly, this pessimistic note is anticipated in the earlier part of the Gospel at three points: 3:6 (Jesus’ enemies plot his death); 6:6 (faithlessness in Nazareth); and 8:21 (lack of understanding in the disciples). Some scholars suggest that Mark used these three verses to indicate the first three divisions of his book. In addition, other scholars note that two healings of blind men (8:22-26; 10:46-52) seem to provide the opening and the conclusion of a section that emphasizes the spiritual blindness of the disciples. One more structural clue is 14:1, which clearly marks out the final section of the Gospel.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OccasionPurposeTheology\">Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>A few scholars think that Mark may have been combating a heretical sect that stressed the miracles of Jesus and viewed him purely as a divine wonder-worker. Although this view has not gained acceptance as originally formulated, a number of writers do see the Gospel as a theological corrective. Ralph Martin, who links Mark very closely with Paul, suggests that the evangelist is opposing some heretical groups who have distorted Paul’s message by placing exclusive stress on Christ as a <em>heavenly<\/em> figure (cf. the views that Paul himself opposes in Colossians). Mark responds to these aberrations by emphasizing, in Martin’s words, “the paradox of Jesus’ earthly life in which suffering and vindication form a two-beat rhythm.” Even if one decides that this reconstruction, too, is rather speculative, one may nevertheless retain certain elements in it as valid.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars, such as H. Kee, place emphasis on the apocalyptic background of Mark. Kee and others tie this element to the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66, but commitment to this particular historical connection is unnecessary to appreciate the great significance of Mark 13 (Jesus’ apocalyptic discourse) for those original readers of the Gospel who may have been undergoing persecution.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most satisfactory reconstruction links this Gospel to the Neronian persecution in the mid-60s. Mark, for example, is the only Gospel that records that Jesus, after being driven to the wilderness, found himself in the company of wild animals (1:13). This detail, according to William Lane, “was filled with special significance for those called to enter the arena where they stood helpless in the presence of wild beasts.” This interpretation, while not without difficulties, has the advantage of accounting for most of the available data. First, it is compatible with the strong tradition that assigns the origin of Mark’s work to Rome. Second, Mark speaks distinctly to those suffering persecution by introducing them quickly to John’s imprisonment and several other details. Third, related to this is Mark’s emphasis on discipleship. Christians facing persecution must have been tempted to relax the standards (4:17-19). Fourth, given this general situation, one can hardly doubt the significance of our Lord’s apocalyptic message in chapter 13, intended to encourage the disciples in the midst of their trials by reminding them of the glory to follow. Finally, Mark’s clear concern for the Gentile mission fits in with the needs of pagan Rome. The suffering Christians cannot afford to forget the unbelieving society in which they live. In the light of this particular responsibility, Mark assures his readers of what even the Roman centurion began to recognize—surely Jesus <em>is<\/em> the Son of God (15:39).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The development of Mark’s narrative can be presented in six major divisions within a twofold structure:<\/p>\n<li>Introduction (1:1-13)<\/li>\n<li>Part I: Popularity and Opposition (1:14–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>1. Jesus’ authority and the Pharisees’ enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/li>\n<li>2. The people’s response (3:7–6:6a)<\/li>\n<li>3. The disciples’ misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>Part II: Darkness and Death (8:22–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>4. The Messiah’s mission and the disciples’ blind-ness (8:22–10:52)<\/li>\n<li>5. Final ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passion narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>Conclusion (16:1-8)<\/li>\n<p>Although one can hardly claim that this outline corresponds exactly to the author’s original plan (Mark may not have consciously worked out a detailed outline), the sixfold division provides a useful starting point for an interpretive summary of the contents.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Authority and the Pharisees’ Enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Immediately after the introductory portion (1:1-13), which describes John the Baptist’s ministry as well as Jesus’ baptism and temptation, Mark opens the body of the work with a summary statement (vv 14-15). In these two verses he seems to suggest that Jesus’ public ministry, characterized by the proclamation that God’s kingdom is about to be inaugurated, was occasioned by John’s imprisonment. This is followed by the call of the first disciples (vv 16-20) and then by a complex of stories (vv 21-38), all of which report incidents that took place in Capernaum, apparently within a 24-hour period: synagogue instruction followed by the healing of a demoniac; the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law; numerous other healings in the evening; prayer in a lonely place. The statement that Jesus proceeded to expand his ministry throughout the province of Galilee (v 39) is followed by the story of a leper’s cure (vv 40-45). Next are found a very important group of incidents (2:1–3:6), all of them focusing on Jesus’ conflicts with Jewish leaders: the healing and forgiveness of a paralytic; the call of Levi, whose dinner (attended by Jesus as well as by the hated tax gatherers) occasioned some disputes, particularly on the issue of fasting; and two significant stories regarding proper behavior on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<h5>The People’s Response (3:7–6:6a)<\/h5>\n<p>Mark opens this second section as he opened the first: a summary statement (Jesus’ healings by the lake—3:7-12) followed by the official appointment of 12 apostles (vv 13-19). Then follows a section that focuses on the kinds of charges brought against Jesus by his own family and by the scribes (vv 20-22), leading to a response touching on Satan, on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and on what constitutes true membership in his family (vv 23-35). Most of chapter 4 is devoted to Jesus’ parables of the kingdom—the sower, the seed growing secretly, the mustard seed—and includes statements on the nature and purpose of his teachings (4:10-12, 21-25, 33-34). In the evening Jesus and his disciples set out to cross the Sea of Galilee, leading to the stilling of the storm (vv 35-41), the healing of the Gerasene demoniac on the other side of the lake (5:1-20), and, on their return to Capernaum, the healing of a hemorrhaging woman and the raising of Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). The section concludes with Jesus’ visit to his hometown, Nazareth, and the rejection he suffered there (6:1-6a).<\/p>\n<h5>The Disciples’ Misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The third section begins with two introductory passages: the sending out of the 12 (6:6b-13) and the story of John the Baptist’s death (vv 14-29). When the disciples return, Jesus determines to seek some rest, but the crowds follow them; Jesus then teaches and feeds the 5,000 (vv 30-44) and, after crossing the lake (vv 45-52, which includes Jesus’ walk over the water), he performs numerous cures in and around Gennesaret (vv 53-56). Then follows a controversy with the Pharisees regarding the hand-washing ritual (7:1-8), and this incident leads to Christ’s assertion of the authority of God’s word over human tradition (vv 9-13) and to some general instructions on true purity (vv 14-23). The next several stories describe Jesus’ withdrawal from Galilee, first to Tyre, where a gentile woman’s daughter is healed (vv 24-30), then to the Decapolis, where he cures a deaf-mute (vv 31-37) and feeds a crowd of four thousand (8:1-10). The demand of the Pharisees for a sign (vv 11-12) leads to Jesus’ warning against the “leaven” of the Pharisees, a statement misunderstood by the disciples (vv 13-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Messiah’s Mission and the Disciples’ Blindness (8:22–10:52)<\/h5>\n<p>Still away from Galilee, but now in the nearby town of Bethsaida, Jesus heals a blind man (8:22-26). He then leads his disciples north toward Caesarea Philippi, which sets the stage for Peter’s confession (vv 27-30). This recognition on the part of the disciples (of whom Peter is in effect a representative) leads Jesus to prophesy his death, but Peter’s refusal to accept the prophecy calls forth a rebuke and instruction on discipleship (vv 31-38). The failure of the disciples to understand the necessity of Christ’s death provides the background for the Transfiguration (9:1-8), which assures Peter, John, and James that God’s kingdom will indeed come (note v 1); further, the Father himself enjoins them to believe Jesus’ prophecy (v 7). After some words about the resurrection and about the coming of Elijah (vv 9-13), Mark relates the healing of a demoniac boy (vv 14-29). Back in Galilee, a second prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 30-32) is followed, sadly, by a trivial discussion among the disciples as to who is the greatest (vv 33-37). Appropriately, one finds some further instructions concerning discipleship (vv 38-50). Mark next writes that Jesus left Galilee for the last time and began his journey toward the south. During this journey, Jesus delivered teachings on divorce and on the spiritual privileges of children (10:1-16), then met the rich young ruler (vv 17-22), an incident that leads to further words on discipleship (vv 23-31). A third prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 32-34) is again followed by selfish behavior on the part of the disciples, in this case an ambitious request from James and John (vv 35-40). The incident produces indignation among the rest of the disciples, thus necessitating another rebuke from their master, who himself came to serve and to die (vv 41-45). The section ends as it began—by reporting the cure of a blind man, Bartimaeus of Jericho in this story (vv 46-52).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/h5>\n<p>This section seems naturally to divide into three balanced subsections. The first one (11:1-26) includes three events: the Triumphal Entry, the withering of the fig tree, and the cleansing of the temple. The second subsection (11:27–12:44) is particularly important, for here is found Jesus’ final series of controversies with the Jewish leaders. The topics covered are the source of Jesus’ authority (11:27-33), the parable of the wicked husbandmen (12:1-12), the legitimacy of Caesar’s tax (vv 13-17), the Sadducees’ denial of resurrection (vv 18-27), the chief commandment (vv 28-34), and the question regarding David’s son (vv 35-37). This subsection ends with a warning against the scribes and with the story of the widow’s mite (vv 38-44). The third subsection (ch 13) is devoted completely to the Olivet discourse, with its prophecies of destruction, calamities, persecutions, deceivers, and final vindication. The discourse ends with various admonitions to keep alert.<\/p>\n<h5>The Passion Narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/h5>\n<p>This final section, which is introduced by a report of the priests’ plot (14:1-2), may be divided into two subsections. The first one relates the events leading up to Jesus’ trial (vv 3-52). They include the anointing of Jesus (vv 3-9), Judas’s betrayal (vv 10-11), the incidents connected with the Last Supper (vv 12-31), the scene at Gethsemane (vv 32-42), and the arrest (vv 43-52). The second subsection relates Jesus’ trial before the Jews (vv 53-65), Peter’s denials (vv 66-72), the trial before Pilate (15:1-15), the crucifixion (vv 16-41), and the burial (vv 42-47).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel concludes somewhat mysteriously, but no less triumphantly, with the news that Jesus has risen from the dead (16:1-8). The earliest surviving Greek manuscripts, usually regarded as the most reliable, end at verse 8; the majority of manuscripts, however, include an additional 12 verses that report Jesus’ appearances to his disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Mark, John; Matthew, Gospel of; Luke, Gospel of; Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARK, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between <span>AD<\/span> 60 and 68.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AuthorDateProvenance\">Author, Date, Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, although this is by no means certain). At one point Papias states, “The Elder used to say this also: Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that [Peter] remembered concerning the things both said and done by the Lord.” (This quotation was preserved by the fourth-century writer Eusebius of Caesarea in his <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.39.15.) One need not doubt the basic reliability of this statement. Mark—almost surely to be identified with the John Mark of Acts 12:12 (see also 1 Pt 5:13)—was a disciple of Peter, and the second Gospel owes its existence, at least in part, to the apostle’s reminiscences. It does not follow, however, that one has adequately characterized Mark’s work if that is all one says. For instance, Papias’s qualification, “though not in order,” indicates that Mark did not intend to write a chronological biography. Furthermore, Papias goes on to comment (according to one interpretation of his ambiguous words) that Mark (or Peter?) adapted the material to the teaching situation and that therefore Mark is absolved from any (implied) charges of inaccuracy. It appears that from the earliest times Christians appealed to the purposes and circumstances of Mark’s writing in order to account for difficulties in harmonizing the material found in the various Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Other statements from Christian writers in the second, third, and fourth centuries seem dependent on Papias’s testimony, but some additional data they provide may possess independent value. For example, a fairly early document (date uncertain) known as the Anti-Marcionite Prologue asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel somewhere in Italy after Peter’s death (in the mid-60s), and this testimony is considered reliable by many scholars. Still, the possibility that Mark composed his work before Peter’s martyrdom cannot be ruled out completely.<\/p>\n<p>Papias says nothing specific about <em>when<\/em> the Gospel was written. A small minority of scholars date Mark shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Another minority suggest a date in the 40s or 50s on the basis of a papyrus fragment discovered in Qumran called 7Q5. (According to José O’Callaghan, the fragment, which has been dated about <span>AD<\/span> 50–68, should be identified as Mark 6:52-53.) This fragment contains only 20 letters on one side, making the Markan reconstruction very uncertain. Few scholars are convinced that the text is Mark; some think it is part of 1 Enoch or Zechariah. An impressive majority of scholars date Mark in the 60s, with conservatives usually preferring the early years of the decade. Why this preference? If the theory of Markan priority is accepted, then clearly Mark was written before Luke; and since Luke is normally dated by conservatives about <span>AD<\/span> 62, Mark can be no later than <span>AD<\/span> 60 or 61. This line of argument, though strong, is not decisive. In the first place, Luke cannot be dated with complete certainty. Second, the view that Matthew and Luke used Mark (the working assumption of most scholars) is only a hypothesis, and one that is vigorously opposed by some writers. Third, a tradition going back to the second century (see above) asserts that Mark wrote his Gospel <em>after<\/em> Peter’s death, no earlier than <span>AD<\/span> 64. Fourth, one persuasive view regarding the occasion of this Gospel assumes that the Neronian persecution (<span>AD<\/span> 64) had begun. (According to a different view of the occasion, Mark was written after the beginning of the Jewish revolt in <span>AD<\/span> 66.) Therefore, while a date in the early 60s remains possible, it does not require committal.<\/p>\n<p>With regard to the authorship of the second Gospel, there seems to be no compelling reason to deny Papias’s report that Mark (no doubt the John Mark of Acts 12:12) took down Peter’s reminiscences and that these became the basis of his work. Some scholars argue that the Gospel contains geographical inaccuracies (e.g., we have no evidence of a region called Dalmanutha, Mk 8:10) and that a native of Jerusalem such as Mark would have been more reliable in his information. However, the topographical problems in Mark, though real, need not be interpreted as inaccuracies (present ignorance of a place named Dalmanutha is hardly conclusive proof that it did not exist). Furthermore, in other respects (e.g., 14:54, 66) the Gospel reveals an impressive knowledge of local details. Many writers also point out bits of information that support a Petrine background, such as the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (1:30-31). In short, the internal evidence, while falling short of proof, does not at all undermine the tradition preserved by Papias. A generation ago, the trustworthiness of Papias’s testimony was almost universally accepted. This situation has changed somewhat, but even those scholars who adopt a skeptical attitude toward this tradition concede that it <em>may<\/em> be true.<\/p>\n<p>As attention turns to the provenance of the Gospel, the task becomes more difficult. Tradition going back to the second century asserts what may be already implied by Papias—namely, that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome. Although some scholars have suggested other possibilities, such as Galilee and Antioch, these have not proved satisfactory. Mark did spend some time in Rome, and some characteristics in the Gospel (such as Latinisms in the Greek and the explanation of Jewish customs, as in 7:3-4), while proving nothing, are certainly consonant with a Roman origin. Furthermore, one persuasive view of the occasion that gave rise to the Gospel assumes a background of persecution in Rome.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Distinctives\">Distinctives<\/p>\n<p>A number of characteristics of Mark set it apart from the other Gospels. For example, a word usually translated “immediately” occurs more than 40 times in Mark and only a dozen times in the rest of the NT. While this feature could be interpreted as a simple “mannerism,” consonant with Mark’s unpretentious, colloquial style, it certainly adds to the rapid flow of his narrative, which, dwelling more on Jesus’ activity than on his discourses (in contrast to Matthew and Luke), shifts from scene to scene with hardly a pause. Since the Gospel is also quite brief (Luke is nearly twice as long), one may wonder whether the author intended for it to be read at a sitting; even if read aloud, this would take only about one and a half hours. At any rate, there can be little doubt that the work conveys a sense of urgency.<\/p>\n<p>Other characteristics, however, prove more significant. Someone unfamiliar with the story of Jesus who happened to read Mark for the first time would no doubt be taken aback by its rather abrupt beginning. After a brief clause that stands as a sort of title (1:1), Mark moves on to describe in brief the ministry of John the Baptist. Then he introduces Jesus as coming from Nazareth without telling us anything whatever of his earlier life. Furthermore, over one-third of the book (including the so-called Passion narrative) is devoted to Jesus’ last week. These and other factors lend to the work a note of mystery, accentuated by the fact that at various points Mark calls attention to the fear or amazement gripping those who came in contact with Jesus (2:12; 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6; and several other passages, especially the strange words of 10:32). In addition, if one assumes that the Gospel originally ended with 16:8, Mark wished to leave his readers with the same sense of awe that the disciples experienced at Jesus’ resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>But how does one account for this fear and amazement? Mark’s clear answer is that Jesus, though truly a man, is also divine. While Mark’s Gospel exhibits the humanity of Jesus Christ (1:41; 3:5; 8:12; 10:14), his chief emphasis is on the Lord’s deity. Indeed, Mark introduces his book by referring to Jesus as “the Son of God” (a phrase omitted in some manuscripts, however), a position that is recognized both by the demons (3:11; 5:7) and by God himself (9:7). What may well be the true climax of the Gospel occurs at 15:39, where Mark writes that a Gentile, a Roman centurion, upon hearing Jesus’ death cry, exclaimed, “Truly this man was the Son of God!”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The author organized his Gospel according to a simple plan. The first eight chapters summarize the nature of Christ’s public ministry by alternating stories that show his growing popularity with stories that stress the disapproval of the Jewish leaders. This first half of the book, while indicating some of the tensions created by Jesus’ coming, gives the basic impression of success and general optimism. A significant shift then strikes the reader toward the end of chapter 8, particularly beginning with verse 31. At Caesarea Philippi, Peter has just confessed that Jesus is the Messiah, and now for the first time Jesus reveals that as Messiah he must die. The disciples become perplexed and discouraged and their pessimism mounts as this thought is brought home to them repeatedly (9:9, 31; 10:32-34; 14:17-25). In the end they desert their master (14:50).<\/p>\n<p>Interestingly, this pessimistic note is anticipated in the earlier part of the Gospel at three points: 3:6 (Jesus’ enemies plot his death); 6:6 (faithlessness in Nazareth); and 8:21 (lack of understanding in the disciples). Some scholars suggest that Mark used these three verses to indicate the first three divisions of his book. In addition, other scholars note that two healings of blind men (8:22-26; 10:46-52) seem to provide the opening and the conclusion of a section that emphasizes the spiritual blindness of the disciples. One more structural clue is 14:1, which clearly marks out the final section of the Gospel.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OccasionPurposeTheology\">Occasion, Purpose, Theology<\/p>\n<p>A few scholars think that Mark may have been combating a heretical sect that stressed the miracles of Jesus and viewed him purely as a divine wonder-worker. Although this view has not gained acceptance as originally formulated, a number of writers do see the Gospel as a theological corrective. Ralph Martin, who links Mark very closely with Paul, suggests that the evangelist is opposing some heretical groups who have distorted Paul’s message by placing exclusive stress on Christ as a <em>heavenly<\/em> figure (cf. the views that Paul himself opposes in Colossians). Mark responds to these aberrations by emphasizing, in Martin’s words, “the paradox of Jesus’ earthly life in which suffering and vindication form a two-beat rhythm.” Even if one decides that this reconstruction, too, is rather speculative, one may nevertheless retain certain elements in it as valid.<\/p>\n<p>Other scholars, such as H. Kee, place emphasis on the apocalyptic background of Mark. Kee and others tie this element to the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66, but commitment to this particular historical connection is unnecessary to appreciate the great significance of Mark 13 (Jesus’ apocalyptic discourse) for those original readers of the Gospel who may have been undergoing persecution.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most satisfactory reconstruction links this Gospel to the Neronian persecution in the mid-60s. Mark, for example, is the only Gospel that records that Jesus, after being driven to the wilderness, found himself in the company of wild animals (1:13). This detail, according to William Lane, “was filled with special significance for those called to enter the arena where they stood helpless in the presence of wild beasts.” This interpretation, while not without difficulties, has the advantage of accounting for most of the available data. First, it is compatible with the strong tradition that assigns the origin of Mark’s work to Rome. Second, Mark speaks distinctly to those suffering persecution by introducing them quickly to John’s imprisonment and several other details. Third, related to this is Mark’s emphasis on discipleship. Christians facing persecution must have been tempted to relax the standards (4:17-19). Fourth, given this general situation, one can hardly doubt the significance of our Lord’s apocalyptic message in chapter 13, intended to encourage the disciples in the midst of their trials by reminding them of the glory to follow. Finally, Mark’s clear concern for the Gentile mission fits in with the needs of pagan Rome. The suffering Christians cannot afford to forget the unbelieving society in which they live. In the light of this particular responsibility, Mark assures his readers of what even the Roman centurion began to recognize—surely Jesus <em>is<\/em> the Son of God (15:39).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The development of Mark’s narrative can be presented in six major divisions within a twofold structure:<\/p>\n<li>Introduction (1:1-13)<\/li>\n<li>Part I: Popularity and Opposition (1:14–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>1. Jesus’ authority and the Pharisees’ enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/li>\n<li>2. The people’s response (3:7–6:6a)<\/li>\n<li>3. The disciples’ misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/li>\n<li>Part II: Darkness and Death (8:22–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>4. The Messiah’s mission and the disciples’ blind-ness (8:22–10:52)<\/li>\n<li>5. Final ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passion narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/li>\n<li>Conclusion (16:1-8)<\/li>\n<p>Although one can hardly claim that this outline corresponds exactly to the author’s original plan (Mark may not have consciously worked out a detailed outline), the sixfold division provides a useful starting point for an interpretive summary of the contents.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Authority and the Pharisees’ Enmity (1:14–3:6)<\/h5>\n<p>Immediately after the introductory portion (1:1-13), which describes John the Baptist’s ministry as well as Jesus’ baptism and temptation, Mark opens the body of the work with a summary statement (vv 14-15). In these two verses he seems to suggest that Jesus’ public ministry, characterized by the proclamation that God’s kingdom is about to be inaugurated, was occasioned by John’s imprisonment. This is followed by the call of the first disciples (vv 16-20) and then by a complex of stories (vv 21-38), all of which report incidents that took place in Capernaum, apparently within a 24-hour period: synagogue instruction followed by the healing of a demoniac; the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law; numerous other healings in the evening; prayer in a lonely place. The statement that Jesus proceeded to expand his ministry throughout the province of Galilee (v 39) is followed by the story of a leper’s cure (vv 40-45). Next are found a very important group of incidents (2:1–3:6), all of them focusing on Jesus’ conflicts with Jewish leaders: the healing and forgiveness of a paralytic; the call of Levi, whose dinner (attended by Jesus as well as by the hated tax gatherers) occasioned some disputes, particularly on the issue of fasting; and two significant stories regarding proper behavior on the Sabbath.<\/p>\n<h5>The People’s Response (3:7–6:6a)<\/h5>\n<p>Mark opens this second section as he opened the first: a summary statement (Jesus’ healings by the lake—3:7-12) followed by the official appointment of 12 apostles (vv 13-19). Then follows a section that focuses on the kinds of charges brought against Jesus by his own family and by the scribes (vv 20-22), leading to a response touching on Satan, on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and on what constitutes true membership in his family (vv 23-35). Most of chapter 4 is devoted to Jesus’ parables of the kingdom—the sower, the seed growing secretly, the mustard seed—and includes statements on the nature and purpose of his teachings (4:10-12, 21-25, 33-34). In the evening Jesus and his disciples set out to cross the Sea of Galilee, leading to the stilling of the storm (vv 35-41), the healing of the Gerasene demoniac on the other side of the lake (5:1-20), and, on their return to Capernaum, the healing of a hemorrhaging woman and the raising of Jairus’s daughter (vv 21-43). The section concludes with Jesus’ visit to his hometown, Nazareth, and the rejection he suffered there (6:1-6a).<\/p>\n<h5>The Disciples’ Misunderstanding (6:6b–8:21)<\/h5>\n<p>The third section begins with two introductory passages: the sending out of the 12 (6:6b-13) and the story of John the Baptist’s death (vv 14-29). When the disciples return, Jesus determines to seek some rest, but the crowds follow them; Jesus then teaches and feeds the 5,000 (vv 30-44) and, after crossing the lake (vv 45-52, which includes Jesus’ walk over the water), he performs numerous cures in and around Gennesaret (vv 53-56). Then follows a controversy with the Pharisees regarding the hand-washing ritual (7:1-8), and this incident leads to Christ’s assertion of the authority of God’s word over human tradition (vv 9-13) and to some general instructions on true purity (vv 14-23). The next several stories describe Jesus’ withdrawal from Galilee, first to Tyre, where a gentile woman’s daughter is healed (vv 24-30), then to the Decapolis, where he cures a deaf-mute (vv 31-37) and feeds a crowd of four thousand (8:1-10). The demand of the Pharisees for a sign (vv 11-12) leads to Jesus’ warning against the “leaven” of the Pharisees, a statement misunderstood by the disciples (vv 13-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Messiah’s Mission and the Disciples’ Blindness (8:22–10:52)<\/h5>\n<p>Still away from Galilee, but now in the nearby town of Bethsaida, Jesus heals a blind man (8:22-26). He then leads his disciples north toward Caesarea Philippi, which sets the stage for Peter’s confession (vv 27-30). This recognition on the part of the disciples (of whom Peter is in effect a representative) leads Jesus to prophesy his death, but Peter’s refusal to accept the prophecy calls forth a rebuke and instruction on discipleship (vv 31-38). The failure of the disciples to understand the necessity of Christ’s death provides the background for the Transfiguration (9:1-8), which assures Peter, John, and James that God’s kingdom will indeed come (note v 1); further, the Father himself enjoins them to believe Jesus’ prophecy (v 7). After some words about the resurrection and about the coming of Elijah (vv 9-13), Mark relates the healing of a demoniac boy (vv 14-29). Back in Galilee, a second prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 30-32) is followed, sadly, by a trivial discussion among the disciples as to who is the greatest (vv 33-37). Appropriately, one finds some further instructions concerning discipleship (vv 38-50). Mark next writes that Jesus left Galilee for the last time and began his journey toward the south. During this journey, Jesus delivered teachings on divorce and on the spiritual privileges of children (10:1-16), then met the rich young ruler (vv 17-22), an incident that leads to further words on discipleship (vv 23-31). A third prophecy of Jesus’ death (vv 32-34) is again followed by selfish behavior on the part of the disciples, in this case an ambitious request from James and John (vv 35-40). The incident produces indignation among the rest of the disciples, thus necessitating another rebuke from their master, who himself came to serve and to die (vv 41-45). The section ends as it began—by reporting the cure of a blind man, Bartimaeus of Jericho in this story (vv 46-52).<\/p>\n<h5>Final Ministry (11:1–13:37)<\/h5>\n<p>This section seems naturally to divide into three balanced subsections. The first one (11:1-26) includes three events: the Triumphal Entry, the withering of the fig tree, and the cleansing of the temple. The second subsection (11:27–12:44) is particularly important, for here is found Jesus’ final series of controversies with the Jewish leaders. The topics covered are the source of Jesus’ authority (11:27-33), the parable of the wicked husbandmen (12:1-12), the legitimacy of Caesar’s tax (vv 13-17), the Sadducees’ denial of resurrection (vv 18-27), the chief commandment (vv 28-34), and the question regarding David’s son (vv 35-37). This subsection ends with a warning against the scribes and with the story of the widow’s mite (vv 38-44). The third subsection (ch 13) is devoted completely to the Olivet discourse, with its prophecies of destruction, calamities, persecutions, deceivers, and final vindication. The discourse ends with various admonitions to keep alert.<\/p>\n<h5>The Passion Narrative (14:1–15:47)<\/h5>\n<p>This final section, which is introduced by a report of the priests’ plot (14:1-2), may be divided into two subsections. The first one relates the events leading up to Jesus’ trial (vv 3-52). They include the anointing of Jesus (vv 3-9), Judas’s betrayal (vv 10-11), the incidents connected with the Last Supper (vv 12-31), the scene at Gethsemane (vv 32-42), and the arrest (vv 43-52). The second subsection relates Jesus’ trial before the Jews (vv 53-65), Peter’s denials (vv 66-72), the trial before Pilate (15:1-15), the crucifixion (vv 16-41), and the burial (vv 42-47).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel concludes somewhat mysteriously, but no less triumphantly, with the news that Jesus has risen from the dead (16:1-8). The earliest surviving Greek manuscripts, usually regarded as the most reliable, end at verse 8; the majority of manuscripts, however, include an additional 12 verses that report Jesus’ appearances to his disciples.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Mark, John; Matthew, Gospel of; Luke, Gospel of; Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARK, Gospel of Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between AD 60 and 68. Preview • Author, Date, Provenance • Distinctives • Structure • Occasion, Purpose, Theology • Content Author, Date, Provenance Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, alt...","summary_en":"MARK, Gospel of Second book of the NT, probably written by John Mark of Jerusalem sometime between AD 60 and 68. Preview • Author, Date, Provenance • Distinctives • Structure • Occasion, Purpose, Theology • Content Author, Date, Provenance Our most ancient testimony about who wrote the second Gospel comes from Papias (c. 60–130), author of several expositions of Jesus’ teachings, in which he reports various traditions from “the Elder John” (possibly to be identified with the apostle John, alt...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55172,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","summary_en":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82798,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","summary_en":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110424,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","summary_en":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138050,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:12<\/strong> <em>We’ve never seen anything like this before!<\/em> Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","summary_en":"2:12 We’ve never seen anything like this before! Mark consistently records Jesus creating amazement (1:22, 27; 4:41; 6:50-51).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":19452,"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":24671,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Matthew (Person)","title_en":"Matthew (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36857,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teacher","title_en":"Teacher","content_ro":"<h3>TEACHER<\/h3>\n<p>Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” and the verb “to teach” are widely used. John the Baptist was called a teacher (Lk 3:12). The term is used more than 30 times of Jesus (Mt 4:23; 5:2; 7:29; 9:35; 11:1; Mk 1:21; 2:13; 4:1-2; 6:2, 6, 34; Lk 4:15, 31; 5:3; 6:6; Jn 6:59; 7:14, 28; etc.). People recognized his teaching as authoritative (Mt 7:29; Mk 1:22; Lk 4:32). Even as a boy of 12 he conversed in a profound way with the teachers of the law in the temple (Lk 2:46). These men were often associated with the Pharisees (5:17). Gamaliel was a Pharisee and a teacher of the law (Acts 5:34). The term “rabbi” was often used to denote teacher. The rabbi was held in great honor. In the early church the teacher was widely recognized (Acts 13:1; 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:11; Jas 3:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TEACHER<\/h3>\n<p>Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” and the verb “to teach” are widely used. John the Baptist was called a teacher (Lk 3:12). The term is used more than 30 times of Jesus (Mt 4:23; 5:2; 7:29; 9:35; 11:1; Mk 1:21; 2:13; 4:1-2; 6:2, 6, 34; Lk 4:15, 31; 5:3; 6:6; Jn 6:59; 7:14, 28; etc.). People recognized his teaching as authoritative (Mt 7:29; Mk 1:22; Lk 4:32). Even as a boy of 12 he conversed in a profound way with the teachers of the law in the temple (Lk 2:46). These men were often associated with the Pharisees (5:17). Gamaliel was a Pharisee and a teacher of the law (Acts 5:34). The term “rabbi” was often used to denote teacher. The rabbi was held in great honor. In the early church the teacher was widely recognized (Acts 13:1; 1 Cor 12:28-29; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:11; Jas 3:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TEACHER Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3). In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” a...","summary_en":"TEACHER Teachers conserved the values and academia of a nation and passed them on to each new generation. In OT times the first teachers were often parents (Dt 6:7, 20-25; 11:19-21). Leaders like Moses and Aaron were charged with teaching the people (Lv 10:11), and later the priests and Levites had a teaching function (Dt 24:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 17:7-9; Ez 44:23; Mi 3:11). God himself was thought of as a teacher (Pss 25:8, 12; 27:11; 32:8; 86:11; Is 2:3). In the NT the Greek noun for “teacher” a...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55173,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","summary_en":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55174,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","summary_en":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82799,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","summary_en":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82800,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","summary_en":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110425,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","summary_en":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110426,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","summary_en":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138051,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-17<\/strong> This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending <em>disreputable sinners<\/em> such as <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>eating with<\/em> them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","summary_en":"2:13-17 This controversy centers on Jesus’ befriending disreputable sinners such as tax collectors and eating with them.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138052,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:13-15<\/strong> <em>Levi<\/em> was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of <em>tax collector<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">telōnēs<\/span>) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they were regarded as traitors. Jesus invited Levi, a tax collector, to follow him, joining Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Mark 1:16-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","summary_en":"2:13-15 Levi was also called Matthew (cp. Matt 9:9-10). Certain people are known by two names in the New Testament (e.g., Simon=Peter; Saul=Paul; Judas son of James=Thaddaeus, see study note on Mark 3:18). • This kind of tax collector (Greek telōnēs) collected sales taxes, customs, and road tolls, in contrast with those who collected the poll tax (12:14). Local tax collectors like Levi were hated by other Jews because they often gouged the public (Luke 19:8), and as agents of the Romans, they...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":42089,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Matthew (Levi)","title_en":"Matthew (Levi)","content_ro":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","summary_en":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69715,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Matthew (Levi)","title_en":"Matthew (Levi)","content_ro":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","summary_en":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97341,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Matthew (Levi)","title_en":"Matthew (Levi)","content_ro":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","summary_en":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124967,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Matthew (Levi)","title_en":"Matthew (Levi)","content_ro":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Matthew (Levi)<\/h3>\n<p>Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brother of James the son of Alphaeus (the two are not linked in the lists of the apostles, as the other pairs of brothers are).<\/p>\n<p>Jews who collected taxes for the Romans were generally considered despicable sinners by their fellow Jews. They profited from working for the occupying forces and engaged in legalized extortion. Thus it is significant that Jesus called a tax collector to become one of his followers. When Jesus was criticized by the Pharisees for accepting Matthew’s invitation to his home for dinner, and for eating with tax collectors and other disreputable sinners, Jesus used the occasion to teach the importance of compassion. He emphasized that it was precisely for such sinners—not those who considered themselves righteous—that he had come (Matt 9:9-13; Mark 2:14-17; Luke 5:27-32). Matthew responded immediately to Jesus’ call, leaving everything behind to follow Jesus (Luke 5:28). The implication is that he never turned back to tax collecting or his former way of life.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel, written for his fellow Jews, gives us a Jewish perspective on the life and teachings of Jesus, and it includes topics of special interest for those from a Jewish background. His Gospel was the most popular Gospel in the early church, which is probably why it occurs first in the canonical sequence.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:3; Mark 2:14-15; 3:18; Luke 5:27-29; 6:15; Acts 1:13<\/p>","summary_ro":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","summary_en":"Matthew (Levi) Matthew was a tax collector for the Romans and became one of Jesus’ twelve apostles. According to early tradition, he was the author of the Gospel of Matthew. Though he is called Matthew in all the lists of the apostles (Matt 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), he is referred to as Levi—his other name—in two of the accounts of his calling (Mark 2:14-15; Luke 5:27-29; cp. Matt 9:9-10). His father was named Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but there is no certainty that he is the brothe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":1143,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Alphaeus","title_en":"Alphaeus","content_ro":"<h3>ALPHAEUS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of James, one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), thought by some to be the same as Clopas of John 19:25.<\/li>\n<li>2. Father of Levi, the tax collector (Mk 2:14) who is also known in the Gospels as Matthew (Mt 9:9).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>ALPHAEUS<\/h3>\n<li>1. Father of James, one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), thought by some to be the same as Clopas of John 19:25.<\/li>\n<li>2. Father of Levi, the tax collector (Mk 2:14) who is also known in the Gospels as Matthew (Mt 9:9).<\/li>","summary_ro":"ALPHAEUS 1. Father of James, one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), thought by some to be the same as Clopas of John 19:25. 2. Father of Levi, the tax collector (Mk 2:14) who is also known in the Gospels as Matthew (Mt 9:9).","summary_en":"ALPHAEUS 1. Father of James, one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), thought by some to be the same as Clopas of John 19:25. 2. Father of Levi, the tax collector (Mk 2:14) who is also known in the Gospels as Matthew (Mt 9:9).","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6051,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Capernaum","title_en":"Capernaum","content_ro":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAPERNAUM<\/h3>\n<p>City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by the tribe of Naphtali. Two of the characters described as being in Capernaum help to identify its location as being near the border of the Jordan and the political frontier. The story of the centurion (Mt 8:5; Lk 7:2) points to the small garrison of about 100 men found at such a frontier town. The story of Levi’s call to leave the customs post controlling the taxation of the area reflects on the same border character of the town (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27).<\/p>\n<p>Jewish evidence argued for Tell Hum as the site for ancient Capernaum. The Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Capharnaum<\/span> is rendered by the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Kaphar nahum<\/span> in Midrash Kohelet 1.8 and 7.26 (c. <span>AD<\/span> 110), proving that Capernaum still existed in the second century. There is no further mention until 1160, when Benjamin of Tudela refers to “Capharnaum which is Kaphar Nahum.” The Franciscans, who acquired the site, have found a considerable number of coins of that period at Tell Hum, and the ruins of the synagogue there may well date from the third century <span>AD<\/span>. Recent excavations of Tell Hum have revealed that it is unquestionably the site for ancient Capernaum. During the excavations, a private house was uncovered beneath a fourth-century Jewish-Christian place of meeting. As early as the first half of the second century, it had served as an assembly hall for the early Christians. Inscriptions and the reports from early Christian travelers make it likely that it was the home of Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Capernaum was an important settlement, with a Roman garrison, adopted by Jesus as his own city after his rejection by Nazareth (Mt 9:1). Here he was at home (Mk 2:1) and performed many miracles (Mk 1:34): the healing of the centurion’s servant (Mt 8:5); the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law (Mk 1:31); and the exorcism of the unclean spirit (Mk 1:23; Lk 4:33). Thus highly favored by the ministry of Jesus, there was also a heavy curse imposed on the city because of its unrepentance: “And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades” (Mt 11:23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","summary_en":"CAPERNAUM City of Galilee, mentioned only in the Gospels, which was the headquarters of much of Jesus’ ministry. It lay on the northwest side of the Sea of Galilee (or Lake of Gennesaret). Its name means “village of Nahum,” but it is impossible to say who this Nahum was, whether the OT writer or someone else. Matthew gives us the following information: Capernaum was located near the Sea of Galilee, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali (Mt 4:13). The west shore of the lake was settled by t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18378,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"James (Person)","title_en":"James (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JAMES (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name.<\/li>\n<p>The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it with their views on the perpetual virginity of Mary. But there seems to be no good reason to challenge the fact from Scripture. As with the other brothers, James apparently did not accept Jesus’ authority during his earthly life (Jn 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is no specific mention of James’s conversion; it may have dated from Jesus’ appearance to him and the others after Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor 15:7). He became head of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal 2:9). Although Jesus had always taught the relative subordination of family ties (Mt 12:48-50; Mk 3:33-35; Lk 8:21), it is hard to believe that James’s authority was not somehow enhanced because of his relationship to the Master.<\/p>\n<p>James was regarded as an apostle (Gal 1:19), although he was not one of the Twelve. Some suggest he was a replacement for the martyred son of Zebedee; others infer his apostleship by widening the scope of that term to embrace both “the Twelve” and “all the apostles” (see the two separate categories cited in 1 Cor 15:5, 7).<\/p>\n<p>Tradition stated that James was appointed the first bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord himself as well as the apostles. What is certain is that he presided over the first Council of Jerusalem, called to consider the terms for admission of Gentiles into the Christian church, and he may have formulated the decree that met with the approval of all his colleagues and was sent to the churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (Acts 15:19-20). James evidently regarded his own special ministry as being to the Jews, and his was a mediating role in the controversy that arose in the young church around the place of the law for those who had become Christians, from both Gentile and Jewish origins.<\/p>\n<p>That he continued to have strong Jewish-Christian sympathies is apparent from the request made to Paul when the latter visited Jerusalem for the last time (Acts 21:18-25). This was also the last mention in Acts of James’s career. His name also occurs in the NT as the traditional author of the Epistle of James, where he describes himself as “a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Jas 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>According to Hegesippus (c. 180), James’s faithful adherence to the Jewish law and his austere lifestyle led to the designation “the Just.” It seems clear that James suffered martyrdom. Josephus places it in the year 61, when there was a Jewish uprising after the death of Festus the procurator and before his successor had been appointed.<\/p>\n<li>2. James, son of Alphaeus; one of the 12 apostles.<\/li>\n<p>James, son of Alphaeus, is always listed as one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), but nothing is known for certain about him. Levi (also known as Matthew) is also described as the son of Alphaeus (Mk 2:14), but it is improbable that he and James were brothers. Many scholars have identified him with the one called “James the less” or “James the smaller.” The description “the less” seems to have been given to distinguish him from the son of Zebedee, and it may signify that he was either smaller or younger than Zebedee’s son (the Greek word can cover both interpretations).<\/p>\n<li>3. James, son of Zebedee. One of the 12 apostles; the first of them to be martyred (<span>AD<\/span> 44).<\/li>\n<p>James was a Galilean fisherman whose circumstances we can suppose to have been comfortable (Mk 1:19-20) and who was called to be one of the disciples at the same time as his brother John (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20). It is reasonable to assume that he was older than John, both because he is nearly always mentioned first and because John is sometimes identified as “the brother of James” (Mt 10:2; 17:1; Mk 3:17; 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>James, John, and Simon Peter, who were part of a fishing partnership that included Andrew, Simon’s brother (Lk 5:10), were a trio who attained in some sense a place of primacy among the disciples. They are found at the center of things—for example, when Jairus’s daughter was raised (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51), at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28), on the Mount of Olives (Mk 13:3), and in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). It was James and John, moreover, who had earlier accompanied Jesus to the home of Simon and Andrew (Mk 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>James and John were given by Jesus the nickname Boanerges, or “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17), when they were rebuked by the Lord for impetuous speech and for having totally misconceived the purpose of his coming. This may have been the consequence of the suggestion made by them that they should pray for the destruction of the Samaritan village, the inhabitants of which had rejected the Lord’s messengers (Lk 9:54; cf. Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>The presumptuous and ill-considered thinking of the two brothers was obvious also when, after asking with his brother for a place of honor in the kingdom, James was corecipient of the prophecy that they would drink the cup their Master was to drink (Mk 10:35-40; cf. Mt 20:20-23). The two sons of Zebedee are also assumed to have been present with the other disciples when the risen Christ appeared by the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1), though curiously James’s name is nowhere mentioned in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>We know nothing about James’s career subsequently until about the year 44, when Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled: James was killed “by the sword” by Herod Agrippa I, and thus became the first of the Twelve whose martyrdom was referred to in the NT (Acts 12:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The wife of Zebedee was Salome (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:40), who may have been a sister of the Lord’s mother (Jn 19:25). If this were so, it would mean that James and John were first cousins of Jesus and that they may have considered themselves to have been in a privileged position.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JAMES (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name.<\/li>\n<p>The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it with their views on the perpetual virginity of Mary. But there seems to be no good reason to challenge the fact from Scripture. As with the other brothers, James apparently did not accept Jesus’ authority during his earthly life (Jn 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is no specific mention of James’s conversion; it may have dated from Jesus’ appearance to him and the others after Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor 15:7). He became head of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal 2:9). Although Jesus had always taught the relative subordination of family ties (Mt 12:48-50; Mk 3:33-35; Lk 8:21), it is hard to believe that James’s authority was not somehow enhanced because of his relationship to the Master.<\/p>\n<p>James was regarded as an apostle (Gal 1:19), although he was not one of the Twelve. Some suggest he was a replacement for the martyred son of Zebedee; others infer his apostleship by widening the scope of that term to embrace both “the Twelve” and “all the apostles” (see the two separate categories cited in 1 Cor 15:5, 7).<\/p>\n<p>Tradition stated that James was appointed the first bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord himself as well as the apostles. What is certain is that he presided over the first Council of Jerusalem, called to consider the terms for admission of Gentiles into the Christian church, and he may have formulated the decree that met with the approval of all his colleagues and was sent to the churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (Acts 15:19-20). James evidently regarded his own special ministry as being to the Jews, and his was a mediating role in the controversy that arose in the young church around the place of the law for those who had become Christians, from both Gentile and Jewish origins.<\/p>\n<p>That he continued to have strong Jewish-Christian sympathies is apparent from the request made to Paul when the latter visited Jerusalem for the last time (Acts 21:18-25). This was also the last mention in Acts of James’s career. His name also occurs in the NT as the traditional author of the Epistle of James, where he describes himself as “a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Jas 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>According to Hegesippus (c. 180), James’s faithful adherence to the Jewish law and his austere lifestyle led to the designation “the Just.” It seems clear that James suffered martyrdom. Josephus places it in the year 61, when there was a Jewish uprising after the death of Festus the procurator and before his successor had been appointed.<\/p>\n<li>2. James, son of Alphaeus; one of the 12 apostles.<\/li>\n<p>James, son of Alphaeus, is always listed as one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), but nothing is known for certain about him. Levi (also known as Matthew) is also described as the son of Alphaeus (Mk 2:14), but it is improbable that he and James were brothers. Many scholars have identified him with the one called “James the less” or “James the smaller.” The description “the less” seems to have been given to distinguish him from the son of Zebedee, and it may signify that he was either smaller or younger than Zebedee’s son (the Greek word can cover both interpretations).<\/p>\n<li>3. James, son of Zebedee. One of the 12 apostles; the first of them to be martyred (<span>AD<\/span> 44).<\/li>\n<p>James was a Galilean fisherman whose circumstances we can suppose to have been comfortable (Mk 1:19-20) and who was called to be one of the disciples at the same time as his brother John (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20). It is reasonable to assume that he was older than John, both because he is nearly always mentioned first and because John is sometimes identified as “the brother of James” (Mt 10:2; 17:1; Mk 3:17; 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>James, John, and Simon Peter, who were part of a fishing partnership that included Andrew, Simon’s brother (Lk 5:10), were a trio who attained in some sense a place of primacy among the disciples. They are found at the center of things—for example, when Jairus’s daughter was raised (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51), at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28), on the Mount of Olives (Mk 13:3), and in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). It was James and John, moreover, who had earlier accompanied Jesus to the home of Simon and Andrew (Mk 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>James and John were given by Jesus the nickname Boanerges, or “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17), when they were rebuked by the Lord for impetuous speech and for having totally misconceived the purpose of his coming. This may have been the consequence of the suggestion made by them that they should pray for the destruction of the Samaritan village, the inhabitants of which had rejected the Lord’s messengers (Lk 9:54; cf. Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>The presumptuous and ill-considered thinking of the two brothers was obvious also when, after asking with his brother for a place of honor in the kingdom, James was corecipient of the prophecy that they would drink the cup their Master was to drink (Mk 10:35-40; cf. Mt 20:20-23). The two sons of Zebedee are also assumed to have been present with the other disciples when the risen Christ appeared by the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1), though curiously James’s name is nowhere mentioned in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>We know nothing about James’s career subsequently until about the year 44, when Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled: James was killed “by the sword” by Herod Agrippa I, and thus became the first of the Twelve whose martyrdom was referred to in the NT (Acts 12:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The wife of Zebedee was Salome (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:40), who may have been a sister of the Lord’s mother (Jn 19:25). If this were so, it would mean that James and John were first cousins of Jesus and that they may have considered themselves to have been in a privileged position.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JAMES (Person) 1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name. The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it ...","summary_en":"JAMES (Person) 1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name. The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22992,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Levi (Person)","title_en":"Levi (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>LEVI (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s third son by Leah (Gn 29:34). The etymology of the name is uncertain. Levi’s name is associated with the tragedy at Shechem, where the male inhabitants of the city were ruthlessly murdered when Levi and Simeon sought to avenge the violation of their sister Dinah by Shechem the Hivite. Jacob condemned the act and before his death pronounced a judgment on Levi’s behavior (49:5-7). According to these words, Levi’s descendants were to be dispersed among the tribes.<\/li>\n<p>The tribe of Levi was composed of the descendants of Levi’s three sons: Gershon (Gershom), Kohath, and Merari. Moses, Aaron, and Miriam traced their genealogy to Kohath (Ex 6:16). The Levites remained faithful to Yahweh at the occasion of the golden calf by Mt Horeb. They were rewarded with the right to special service in and around the tabernacle (ch 32) and later in the temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levi, Tribe of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Tax collector in Capernaum (Mk 2:14); one of the 12 disciples who was also named Matthew (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; cf. Mt 9:9). <em>See<\/em> Matthew (Person).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Melki and ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:24). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>4. Son of Simeon and ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>LEVI (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Jacob’s third son by Leah (Gn 29:34). The etymology of the name is uncertain. Levi’s name is associated with the tragedy at Shechem, where the male inhabitants of the city were ruthlessly murdered when Levi and Simeon sought to avenge the violation of their sister Dinah by Shechem the Hivite. Jacob condemned the act and before his death pronounced a judgment on Levi’s behavior (49:5-7). According to these words, Levi’s descendants were to be dispersed among the tribes.<\/li>\n<p>The tribe of Levi was composed of the descendants of Levi’s three sons: Gershon (Gershom), Kohath, and Merari. Moses, Aaron, and Miriam traced their genealogy to Kohath (Ex 6:16). The Levites remained faithful to Yahweh at the occasion of the golden calf by Mt Horeb. They were rewarded with the right to special service in and around the tabernacle (ch 32) and later in the temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Levi, Tribe of.<\/p>\n<li>2. Tax collector in Capernaum (Mk 2:14); one of the 12 disciples who was also named Matthew (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; cf. Mt 9:9). <em>See<\/em> Matthew (Person).<\/li>\n<li>3. Son of Melki and ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:24). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>\n<li>4. Son of Simeon and ancestor of Jesus (Lk 3:29). <em>See<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/li>","summary_ro":"LEVI (Person) 1. Jacob’s third son by Leah (Gn 29:34). The etymology of the name is uncertain. Levi’s name is associated with the tragedy at Shechem, where the male inhabitants of the city were ruthlessly murdered when Levi and Simeon sought to avenge the violation of their sister Dinah by Shechem the Hivite. Jacob condemned the act and before his death pronounced a judgment on Levi’s behavior (49:5-7). According to these words, Levi’s descendants were to be dispersed among the tribes. The tr...","summary_en":"LEVI (Person) 1. Jacob’s third son by Leah (Gn 29:34). The etymology of the name is uncertain. Levi’s name is associated with the tragedy at Shechem, where the male inhabitants of the city were ruthlessly murdered when Levi and Simeon sought to avenge the violation of their sister Dinah by Shechem the Hivite. Jacob condemned the act and before his death pronounced a judgment on Levi’s behavior (49:5-7). According to these words, Levi’s descendants were to be dispersed among the tribes. The tr...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24673,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Matthew (Person)","title_en":"Matthew (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24680,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65471,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67287,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","title_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","content_ro":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","summary_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93097,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94913,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","title_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","content_ro":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","summary_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120723,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122539,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","title_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","content_ro":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","summary_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148349,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150165,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","title_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service","content_ro":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Paul’s Apostolic Service<\/h3>\n<p>To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places where Christ’s name was not yet known (see Rom 15:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s message of Good News was clear and incisive (see, e.g., 2 Cor 5:1-21), and it was backed up and illustrated by his own life. He always sought to minister with truth and integrity (2:17; 4:2). And as Paul carried the message of Christ, the cross served as the pattern for his ministry to others (11:16-33).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s authority was apparently disputed, so he needed to offer a personal account of how God had called him as an apostle and established his ministry at Corinth (10:12-18). For those who demanded proof of Paul’s credentials (13:3) and who criticized his weaknesses, he simply pointed to the cross of Jesus (13:4) and to the lessons he had learned from it (see 4:10). Paul was quite conscious of his own limitations and that he needed divine grace to accomplish his work. But true apostolic authority expresses itself precisely in human weakness reinforced by divine strength (12:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Paul also performed miraculous works to verify his claim to apostleship (12:12). These works apparently were not enough to prevent doubts from arising in the young church at Corinth. Yet Paul exercised his ministry with great patience, not giving up when the Corinthians challenged him. This patience replicates that of Jesus, who endured much hositility from others (Heb 12:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s example provides a few lessons for all those who are involved in Christian service: (1) Christian leaders should take criticism as a summons to self-examination, to see if any accusation is well-founded. (2) Christian leaders should be patient in the face of groundless opposition, staying focused on the task at hand. (3) There is a place for reasoned defense and explanation of one’s motives, while at the same time recognizing that the Lord is the ultimate Judge.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 10:5-42; 28:18-20; Mark 1:17; 2:14; 3:14-15; John 21:15-17; Acts 1:2-8, 20-26; 2:42-43; 4:33; 5:12; 6:2-4; 10:39-43; 14:3; Rom 1:5; 15:17-21; 1 Cor 4:8-13; 12:28-29; 2 Cor 2:17; 4:2; 6:3-12; 10:12-18; Eph 2:20; 3:4-5; 4:11-13; 1 Thes 2:7-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","summary_en":"Paul’s Apostolic Service To understand Paul’s role as an apostle of Jesus Christ, there is perhaps no better place to look than Paul’s own description in 2 Corinthians. In this letter, Paul reveals the heart of his ministry. Paul was God’s special messenger for the establishment and nurture of churches in the Gentile world. His service was marked by seriousness and sincerity, and his message raised life and death issues (2 Cor 2:15-17). As a pioneer missionary, he took the Good News to places...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":21075,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judaism","title_en":"Judaism","content_ro":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDAISM<\/h3>\n<p>Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 <span>BC<\/span>) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheSecondTemple\">The Period of the Second Temple (515 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 <span>BC<\/span> on the part of the 10 northern tribes by levying unreasonably high taxes (1 Kgs 12). From that time on, the kingdoms of Israel (or Samaria, the northern kingdom) and Judah (the southern kingdom) maintained a separate existence. The northern kingdom fell to the Assyrians in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, and thousands of captives, primarily members of the upper class, were exiled forcibly and taken to Assyria, where they presumably intermarried with the native population and disappeared from history. The kingdom of Judah survived as an independent state until 597 <span>BC<\/span>, when it came under the control of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The temple was finally destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span> and many captives were carried off to Babylonia, beginning a period of exile that was to last two generations. The Babylonians were defeated by Cyrus the Persian in 539 <span>BC<\/span>, and the following year the king issued a decree permitting all captive peoples to return to the lands of their origin (2 Chr 36:22-23; Ezr 1). At least four waves of Jewish expatriates returned from Mesopotamia to Judea during the century following the decree of Cyrus, under such leaders as Sheshbazzar, Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Many Jews, however, chose to remain in their adopted Mesopotamian homeland. The dedication of the second temple in the spring of 515 <span>BC<\/span> provided a formal end to the exilic period of 70 years (Jer 29:10), and was a direct result of the prophetic exhortations of Haggai and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>In Judea the Jewish people were ruled by governors who held office at the pleasure of the Persian king. One of the earlier governors was Zerubabbel (Hg 1:1; 2:1-2), a descendant of David (1 Chr 3:10-19). In some way he shared rule with the high priest Jeshua ben Jehozadak. Palestine was part of one of the 20 satrapies of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 539 to 331 <span>BC<\/span>, when it fell to the Greeks under Alexander the Great. Little is known about the historical developments in Palestine during most of the Persian period. When Alexander died in 323 <span>BC<\/span>, his empire was divided up among his generals; Egypt and Palestine fell to Ptolemy I. The Ptolemies were benevolent despots who allowed the Jews of Palestine a measure of freedom and autonomy. After the battle of Paneion in 198 <span>BC<\/span>, Palestine came under the rule of the Seleucid Empire, founded by Seleucus I, another of Alexander’s generals.<\/p>\n<p>The Seleucid Empire embraced a very large area with a diverse population, extending from Asia Minor and Palestine in the west to the borders of India on the east. Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) ascended the Seleucid throne in 175 <span>BC<\/span> and attempted to unify his vast empire by Hellenizing it (i.e., by forcing the adoption of Greek language and culture). Local cultures and religions were forcibly suppressed as a result of this policy, and the Jewish state in Palestine was perhaps the hardest hit of all. In 167 <span>BC<\/span> Antiochus IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Olympian Zeus, sacrificed a sow on the altar, destroyed scrolls containing the Jewish Scriptures, and forbade the rite of circumcision. This repression triggered a revolt led by an aged priest named Mattathias and his sons. The Seleucids were repulsed, and finally in 164 <span>BC<\/span> the temple was retaken by Mattathias’s son Judas the Maccabee (an epithet meaning “the hammer”). This Jewish victory has been commemorated annually by the festival of Hanukkah (“dedication”). Judas and his brothers, called Maccabees or Hasmoneans (Mattathias was of the house of Hasmon), and their descendants ruled Judea from 164 to 63 <span>BC<\/span>, when Palestine fell to the Roman general Pompey. Thereafter, Palestine remained a vassal of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Hyrcanus, a Hasmonean, was high priest after the conquest of Judea by the Romans, though Antipater (an Idumean) was the real power behind Hyrcanus. The sons of Antipater, Phasael and Herod, were governors of Jerusalem and Galilee, respectively. Upon the assassination of Antipater in 43 <span>BC<\/span>, and through his connections in Rome, Herod (later called Herod the Great) was named king of Judea by the Roman senate; he reigned from 37 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>. When he died, Palestine was divided up by the emperor Augustus (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14) and placed under the governorship of three of Herod’s sons: Herod Archelaus (ethnarch of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 6), Herod Antipas (tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39), and Herod Philip (tetrarch of Batanea, Trachonitis, and other small states from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 34). These territories were generally placed under Roman procurators after the sons of Herod had died or been deposed. For a brief period (<span>AD<\/span> 41–44), Herod Agrippa I, the grandson of Herod the Great, ruled virtually the same territory as his grandfather. Upon his death (narrated in Acts 12:20-23), his territories were placed under Roman procurators. The greed and ineptitude of these procurators provoked the Jewish populace to rebel. The ill-fated Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 resulted in the destruction of the second temple by the tenth Roman legion under Titus in <span>AD<\/span> 70. The revolt was completely quelled in <span>AD<\/span> 73, when more than 900 Jews under siege in the desert fortress of Masada near the Dead Sea committed mass suicide rather than fall into Roman hands. These tragic events ended permanently the temple cult and the priestly system in Judaism.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>The Babylonian conquest of Judea and the destruction of the Solomonic temple in 586 <span>BC<\/span> produced dramatic social and religious changes in Jewish life. The cessation of the temple cult struck a serious blow at the heart of the Israelite religion, since the Jerusalem temple alone was the legitimate and divinely appointed place for discharging much of the ritual requirement of the Mosaic law, chiefly the sacrificial cult. Even the three annual pilgrimage festivals, Succoth (Tabernacles), Pesach (Passover), and Shavuoth (Weeks) could no longer be observed by pious Jews who had remained in Judea after 586 <span>BC<\/span>. When after 538 <span>BC<\/span> many exiles chose to return to Judea, many others elected to remain in their new homeland. For the latter, the temple cult, even when reinstituted in 516 <span>BC<\/span>, could no longer play a significant role in their religious lives.<\/p>\n<p>During the exilic and early postexilic period, the peculiar Jewish institution of the synagogue (a Greek word meaning “gathering place”) began to evolve. The synagogue became such a popular and useful institution for Jewish communities outside Palestine that in the centuries after the dedication of the second temple they sprang up throughout Palestine, many in Jerusalem itself. By the end of the second temple period, the synagogue had come to play three important functions in Jewish life: it served as a house of prayer, a house of study, and a place of assembly. First-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship is illustrated in Luke 4:16-30 and Acts 13:13-42. The focus of the service was a reading of a selection from the Torah (Law of Moses), then one from the Haphtorah (Prophets). These readings were followed by a homily based on Scripture. Other elements in first-century <span>AD<\/span> synagogue worship included the recitation of the Shema (“Hear, O Israel”), a combination of biblical passages including Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 11:13-21 and Numbers 15:37-41, and the Shemoneh Esreh (Eighteen Benedictions) called the Amidah (“standing”) because it was recited while standing upright. Jews also wore fringes on their garments in obedience to Numbers 15:38-39 (Mt 23:5), and phylacteries on their foreheads and left arms. Phylacteries are little boxes containing the portions of Scripture recited in Shema; they were used in literal fulfillment of the command in Deuteronomy 6:8. Archaeologists have discovered first-century phylacteries in the ruins of Masada.<\/p>\n<p>Outside of Palestine, Mesopotamia became the second most important center of Judaism. The Babylonian Jewish community was known as the Golah (“captivity”), and its titular head was called the Resh Galuta or Exilarch (both terms mean “leader of the captivity”). By the end of the exilic period, the descendants of the ancient original captives had forgotten Hebrew and had adopted Aramaic, the international language of the ancient Near East and sister language to Hebrew, as their first language. Even in Palestine, Aramaic was the primary language spoken. Thus, when portions of Scripture were read in synagogue services in Hebrew, most of those present were unable to understand what was read. This problem was solved by providing a methurgeman (translator) who would translate orally short sections of Scripture. Eventually these targums (“translations”) were reduced to writing, beginning in the second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, it had been estimated that there were from four to seven million Jews in the Greco-Roman world, perhaps three to four times the population of Palestine. Jews in lands outside of Palestine came to be known collectively as the Diaspora (“scattering”). After the Greeks dominated the Mediterranean world through Alexander and his successors, Greek became the common language throughout this region. Just as Mesopotamian Jews spoke Aramaic in place of Hebrew, so Jews in the Greco-Roman world came to speak Greek. By the middle of the third century <span>BC<\/span>, Hellenistic Jews began to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. This translation, called the Septuagint (a term meaning “seventy,” based on a legend that it was translated simultaneously by seventy Jewish scholars), contained a more extensive canon of Scripture than that recognized by Palestinian Judaism. This reflects the more liberal attitudes of Hellenistic Jews.<\/p>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the major sects within Palestinian Judaism came into being. The Hasidim (“pious”) were members of a religious association that aided the Hasmoneans in the revolt against the Seleucids (1 Macc 2:42; 7:13) but later opposed them when they claimed rights to the priesthood. Both the Pharisees and Essenes may have their origin in this religious sect. The Sadducees were perhaps connected with Zadok, a high priest appointed by David. Zadok’s descendants were regarded as the only legitimate priestly line; they were devoted above the Levites in Ezekiel 40–48. The Sadducees were a wealthy, aristocratic class that monopolized the high priesthood. They did not believe in angels, spirits, life after death, or the resurrection (Acts 23:8), nor did they accept the validity of the oral law as developed by the Pharisees. They left no writings and disappeared with the destruction of the temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees (“separated ones”) first appear in our sources toward the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span> and were involved primarily in political affairs. They represented the common people against the tyrannical Hasmonean ruler Alexander Janneus (103–76 <span>BC<\/span>), who had hundreds of Pharisees executed in reprisal. By the first century <span>AD<\/span>, the Pharisees seem wholly concerned with religious matters and were noted for the scrupulous observance of the Mosaic law as traditionally interpreted. On grounds of ritual purity, they separated themselves from other Jews who were not as scrupulous and who might contaminate them. Pharisees went about in groups called Haberim (“associates”) in which they were insulated from those who were lax religiously. In their zeal to remain faithful to the Mosaic law, the Pharisees developed an oral law (later erroneously attributed to Moses) that served as a fence around the Torah. This oral law was an interpretation and expansion of the 613 commands in the Mosaic law; it was finally compiled and reduced to written form as the Mishnah (“teaching”) in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>. Paul (Acts 22:3; 23:6; 26:5; Phil 3:5) and many other early Christians were converts from Pharisaism (Acts 15:5). Pharisaic Judaism survived the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 to form the rabbinic Judaism that dominated Jewish religious life from the second century <span>AD<\/span> to modern times.<\/p>\n<p>The Essenes were another religious sect within Judaism that had its origins in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. Like the Pharisees, the Essenes were concerned principally with maintaining ritual purity in obedience to the law of Moses. The Essenes lived and worked in Jewish society; they tried to influence people by the simple, altruistic life they followed. Some Essenes also lived in their own communities, to which they returned each night after work. There were numerous religious factions within Judaism, and one such group, which may only have had vague connections with the Essenes, established a community on the western shore of the Dead Sea. This group regarded itself as the true Israel and in the wilderness prepared for the final visitation of God by keeping themselves pure from all defilement. Many documents written by members of this sect were discovered in caves near the Dead Sea where they had been hidden just before the Romans destroyed the settlement. These documents, the Dead Sea Scrolls, have provided detailed information about this religious sect and its beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>The Zealots were another Jewish sect, who may be related to the Sicarii (“dagger men”). This group of political activists flourished from <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 66. Regarding God alone as their sovereign, they attempted to overthrow the Romans and those who collaborated with them by violent means, including assassination. They helped to foment the Jewish revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73 and perished with Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>Social class and status in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine were determined in accordance with the rules of ritual purity. The upper class comprised members of the religious establishment, such as the Sadducees, scribes, Pharisees, and Jerusalem priests. The Sanhedrin was a deliberative body whose membership was drawn from these groups. For all practical purposes there was no middle class. The lower class consisted primarily of the Am Ha Arez (“people of the land”)—Jews who were ignorant of the law through lack of education and who did not scrupulously observe those commandments with which they were familiar. The generally hostile attitude of the Pharisees toward the Am Ha Arez is expressed in John 7:49: “But this crowd, who do not know the law, are accursed” (<span>rsv<\/span>). There was yet another social class in first-century Palestine, which can be designated as “untouchables.” This group was composed of Samaritans, tax collectors, prostitutes, shepherds, lepers, Gentiles, and perhaps worst of all, Jews who became as Gentiles (e.g., the prodigal son of Lk 15:11-32). The rules of ritual purity as generally observed prevented any form of social contact between the upper class and the untouchables, and made contacts with the Am Ha Arez highly undesirable. Against this background, the horror of the Pharisees over Jesus’ association with tax collectors and sinners is throughly understandable (Mk 2:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>A further consequence of this religious criterion for determining social class and status was an uneasy tension between Jerusalem and the rural areas of Palestine, particularly Galilee, during the last two centuries of the second temple period. Those in Jerusalem regarded Galilee as a place where ignorance of the Torah was the rule (Jn 1:46). Jerusalem was primarily a religious center, whose major industry was the temple cult. The total population of Jerusalem in the first century <span>AD<\/span> has been estimated at 25,000 to 40,000. Most of these were either artisans and craftsmen devoted to building and adorning the temple (still incomplete before it was destroyed; see Jn 2:20) or priests and Levites involved in the many ritual activities of the temple. Though Jews were expected to travel to Jerusalem for each of the three annual pilgrimage festivals, this requirement proved difficult for rural Palestinian farmers.<\/p>\n<p>Further, the tithe demanded by Mosaic command was only on the produce of the land, not upon wages or bartered goods. The rural farmers, therefore, bore the brunt of this taxation and quite naturally resented the privileged position of urban artisans, merchants, and priests who were not obliged to tithe. The temptation not to tithe the produce of the land was very great, and many farmers succumbed to it. Their untithed produce was not kosher, and thus to be avoided by those, like the Pharisees, who were religiously scrupulous. In addition to the first and second tithes demanded of farmers (the second tithe had to be spent in the vicinity of Jerusalem), it has been estimated that Roman tax levies amounted to 10 to 15 percent of an individual’s income. Religious taxes, together with Roman taxes, added up to a crushing tax burden of from 25 to 30 percent. The fact that the Jews finally revolted against their Roman oppressors in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is not difficult to comprehend. Throughout the first century <span>AD<\/span>, in fact, minor revolts in Palestine occurred with predictable frequency. Many of these occurred during the three annual pilgrimage festivals in Jerusalem, when the normal population of 25,000 to 40,000 swelled to 500,000 or more. These festivals provided ideal opportunities for uprisings, and the Romans were particularly alert for such eventualities. Jesus was executed during one such Passover festival because he was suspected of being a political revolutionary (Mk 15:26).<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period provided the setting for the rise and fall of apocalypticism within Judaism. Apocalypticism (from a Greek word meaning “revelation”) was a kind of eschatology (“account of final events”) that assumed that ideal conditions could not be restored on earth unless God first intervened climactically to destroy evil (particularly foreign oppressors) and vindicate the righteous (Israel). Apocalyptic visionaries composed many documents, called apocalypses, in which they attempted to read the signs of the times and predict the coming of the visitation of God. Since there was a widespread consciousness that the era of prophecy was over, these apocalyptists wrote not under their own names but under the names of ancient Israelite worthies, such as Moses, Abraham, Enoch, and Ezra. Among the more significant expectations of Jewish apocalypticism were (1) the coming of a Messiah; (2) the coming of a great period of tribulation, sometimes called the messianic woes; (3) the resurrection of the just; (4) the judgment of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Apocalyptic beliefs probably provided the motivation for most—if not all—of the Jewish revolts against the Romans.<\/p>\n\n<p>Some portions of the Hebrew Scriptures were still in the process of composition at the beginning of the second temple period. The last three prophetic books—Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi—were written from the end of the sixth century to the mid fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. Later rabbis expressed the opinion that the Spirit of God had been taken from Israel when these prophets ceased their labors. The Chronicler ends his work by referring to the decree of Cyrus (538 <span>BC<\/span>), and both Ezra-Nehemiah and Esther appear to have been written in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The second temple period witnessed not only the completion of those writings that were later regarded as inspired and authoritative in Judaism but also the full recognition of all 24 sacred books. Prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the Mosaic law had not been observed with any consistency (according to 2 Kgs 22 it had been mislaid for an unknown period of time), nor had the classical prophets always received appropriate recognition. But after 586 <span>BC<\/span> the Torah occupied a position of unquestioned sanctity in the lives and thoughts of the Jewish people, replacing in many respects the temple cult even before its final dissolution in <span>AD<\/span> 70.<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish Scriptures are divided into three sections, designated by Jews with the acrostic “Tanak”: (1) Torah (“Law” or “Revelation”), (2) Nebi’im (“Prophets”), and (3) Kethubim (“Writings”). It is generally claimed that while the Law and Prophets enjoyed canonical status prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Writings were finally declared canonical at the rabbinic council of Jamnia (c. <span>AD<\/span> 90), though the historicity of this is disputed. The rabbis are thought to have discussed whether certain biblical books should continue to be part of Scripture. In reality, the Jewish canon of Scripture was fully defined from traditional usage by the first century <span>BC<\/span>. The Law consisted of five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The Prophets consisted of two sections, the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets). The Writings included Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Ruth, and Daniel. The total number of books in this canon is 24, identical with the Protestant canon of 39 books, since Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, and the 12 are each counted as only one book. The Alexandrian canon of Hellenistic Judaism was more extensive, and the extra books (called Apocrypha by Protestants) are all found in the Roman Catholic OT canon of 46 books.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTalmudicPeriod\">The Talmudic Period (<span>AD<\/span> 73–425)<\/p>\n<h5>Historical Survey<\/h5>\n<p>According to Jewish legend, when the Romans were about to conquer Jerusalem in the revolt of <span>AD<\/span> 66–73, a prominent Pharisee, Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, feigned death and his disciples were permitted to carry him out of the besieged city in a coffin. The more likely scenario is that he received permission from the Romans to move his school from Jerusalem to Jamnia, on the coast of Palestine. The temple cult and the priestly system had disappeared, and rabbinic academies such as that of Rabbi Johanan set themselves to the enormous task of reconstructing Judaism. The older Sanhedrin was reinstituted as the Beth Din (“Court of Law”), and Gamaliel II, a grandson of Hillel, who had presided over the old Sanhedrin, became its leader with the title Nasi (“prince”), or Patriarch. The patriarchate continued until <span>AD<\/span> 425, when Emperor Theodosius II abolished the office upon the death of the last patriarch, Gamaliel VI. In Mesopotamia, Babylonian Judaism experienced a renaissance that lasted until the end of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. This period was called the Age of the Gaonim (“excellencies”) after the heads of the two great rabbinic academies at Sura and Pumpeditha. It was there that the great Babylonian Talmud was compiled by the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 115 various Jewish communities throughout the eastern Mediterranean, including Egypt, Cyprus, and Cyrene, revolted against the Roman emperor Trajan. Without exception these revolts were all put down by Roman legions. Finally, when the emperor Hadrian was on the brink of founding the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of old Jerusalem, the Jews again revolted in <span>AD<\/span> 132, led by a self-proclaimed messiah, Simeon Bar Koziba, who was called Bar-Kochba (“Son of a Star”) by his followers as an allusion to the messianic passage in Numbers 24:17. Bar-Kochba was aided by the famous rabbinic scholar Akiba. This revolt, though initially successful, was put down by the Romans under Julius Severus in 135. Shortly thereafter, Hadrian issued a decree banning all Jews from the new Aelia Capitolina.<\/p>\n<h5>Social and Religious Developments<\/h5>\n<p>During this period, the result of generations of rabbinical scholarship bore fruit with the compilation of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. The rabbinic sages consciously saw themselves as the heirs of the ancient Israelite prophets, who in turn were the heirs of the Mosaic law. They distinguished consciously between their own legal interpretations of the Mosaic law (which they called Halakah, or “walking,” i.e., a guide for life), and the commands in the Torah itself (called Mitvah, or “commandment”). The oral law, developed through generations of rabbinic discussion, was finally compiled and written down through the efforts of the patriarch Judah ha-Nasi (c. <span>AD<\/span> 135–220) during the last quarter of the second century <span>AD<\/span> and became known as the Mishnah (“teaching”). This is a topical arrangement of rabbinic discussions on such subjects as the Sabbath, firstfruits, sacrifices, and women. The Mishnah became the basis for further rabbinic discussion in both Palestine and Babylonia. The decisions of sages who flourished after the writing of the Mishnah were compiled about <span>AD<\/span> 450 in Palestine and about 500 in Babylonia. This second stage beyond the Mishnah was called the Gemara (meaning either “completion” or “repetition”). The Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara make up the Babylonian Talmud, while the same Mishnah with the Jerusalem or Palestinian Gemara comprises the Jerusalem Talmud. Yet another type of rabbinic literature is the Midrashim (“interpretations”), which either follow the order of a particular biblical book or consist of homilies on particular biblical texts. The Targums, paraphrastic translations of Scripture into the Aramaic language, finally came to be written down beginning in the late second century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>After the destruction of the temple, rabbinic Judaism concentrated on the religious significance of the Torah and elevated scholarship to the central role that it still plays in Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism gradually exerted its influence upon diaspora Judaism under the initial leadership of Rabbi Johanan until a kind of rabbinic orthodoxy emerged during the second century. Christianity was one of the major ideological foes of rabbinic Judaism. In order to purge Jewish Christians from their midst, the rabbis introduced an additional benediction to the eighteen benedictions customarily recited at synagogue services. This 19th benediction was a curse upon the <em>minim<\/em> (Christians and other heretics), which Jewish Christians who attended synagogue services found impossible to recite. The line was firmly drawn between Judaism and Christianity by this device, which was employed late in the first century.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead Sea Scrolls; Essenes; Diaspora of the Jews; First Jewish Revolt; Israel, History of; Jew; Judah, Tribe of; Judaism; Pharisees; Philo, Judaeus; Postexilic Period; Sanhedrin; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","summary_en":"JUDAISM Religion and culture of the Jewish people from the beginning of the postexilic period (538 BC) to modern times. The term “Judaism” is derived from “Judah,” the name of the southern kingdom of ancient Israel, while “Jew” is a shortened form of “Judeans.” The Period of the Second Temple (515 BC–AD 70) Historical Survey The united kingdom of Israel under Saul, David, and Solomon came to an end shortly after the death of Solomon. Rehoboam, his son, provoked a revolt about 930 BC on the pa...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36835,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tax Collector","title_en":"Tax Collector","content_ro":"<h3>TAX COLLECTOR<\/h3>\n<p>One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed considerable wealth in the Jericho area (Lk 19:2-10). Such men were regarded as sinners and were often linked in the phrase “tax collectors and sinners” (Mt 9:10-11; 11:19; Mk 2:15-16; Lk 5:30; 19:2-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TAX COLLECTOR<\/h3>\n<p>One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed considerable wealth in the Jericho area (Lk 19:2-10). Such men were regarded as sinners and were often linked in the phrase “tax collectors and sinners” (Mt 9:10-11; 11:19; Mk 2:15-16; Lk 5:30; 19:2-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TAX COLLECTOR One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed consider...","summary_en":"TAX COLLECTOR One who collected taxes for the government. In NT times the Romans collected a variety of taxes. Their own officers undertook some of this work but also delegated it to private individuals, Jews and others, who were required to return to the authorities an agreed-upon sum. Dishonest individuals collected far more than they were required to pay and became a hated group, especially the Jews who cheated fellow Jews. Zacchaeus, a Jew, was a “chief tax collector” who amassed consider...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65473,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93099,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120725,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148351,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":24675,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Matthew (Person)","title_en":"Matthew (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as Matthew is beyond all doubt. It is improbable that Matthew was the brother of James the Less whose father was also named Alphaeus (Mt 10:3), since this fact would have been mentioned in the record of Scripture, as it is in the cases of Peter and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew served King Herod Antipas in Capernaum of Galilee, collecting tariffs on goods passing on the road from Damascus to the Mediterranean Sea. To function in this capacity Matthew would have been an educated man, acquainted with the Greek language as well as the native Aramaic, thus qualifying him to write the Gospel of Matthew. As a tax collector, Matthew may have been a man of wealth, but this occupation also caused him to be despised by the Jews and to be considered among the lowest of people. The Pharisees consistently spoke of tax collectors in the same breath with sinners (Mt 11:19; Mk 2:16; Lk 7:34; 15:1).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew was called while he was working at his tax booth. Jesus passed by on the road and said to him, “Follow me” (Mk 2:14). Matthew left everything and did so (Lk 5:28). Immediately he gave Jesus a great banquet at his house, and a large crowd of his fellow tax collectors and others were there to enjoy it. It was at this feast that the Pharisees and their scribes made the well-known complaint “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?” (Lk 5:30, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<p>It is not certain when Matthew was called, but it is probable that the first six disciples were present on that day, since the Pharisees complained to Christ’s disciples during Matthew’s feast. Unlike the first men Jesus called, Matthew was not originally a follower of John the Baptist.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW (Person) Son of Alphaeus; a tax collector by occupation; chosen by Jesus to be one of the 12 apostles; credited with the authorship of the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew is listed in each of the four rosters of the 12 (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13). Aside from these lists, Matthew is mentioned only in the account of his calling (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27). Before his apostolic call, the Gospels refer to Matthew as Levi (Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27; compare Mt 9:9). The identity of Levi as ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34133,"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":55175,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","summary_en":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82801,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","summary_en":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110427,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","summary_en":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138053,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:16<\/strong> <em>The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees<\/em> understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these <em>tax collectors<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","summary_en":"2:16 The teachers of religious law who were Pharisees understood Jesus’ act of eating with sinners as intentionally accepting them as friends (Luke 15:1-2; 19:5, 7; Acts 11:2-18; Gal 2:11-12). Jesus indicated that these tax collectors and sinners were invited to share in the Kingdom of God. In Jesus’ ministry, even Gentiles were invited to share the Kingdom (Mark 5:1-20; 7:24-30; cp. Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10; John 4:43-54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":30374,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Physician","title_en":"Physician","content_ro":"<h3>PHYSICIAN<\/h3>\n<p>One trained in medicine. The physician tended to and repaired wounds and administered medicines to the sick. In early Israel the diagnosis and treatment of sick people was officially the concern of the priests, although many nonprofessional people practiced the healing art in the small towns and villages. King Asa sought their help for his feet (2 Chr 16:12). Jeremiah inquired about physicians in Gilead (Jer 8:22). Job complained that his friends were useless physicians (Jb 13:4). Scientific medicine and the careful training of physicians awaited the rise of Greek medicine, which by NT times saw medical schools established in various countries in the Greco-Roman world. Remarkable collections of surgical instruments have come from places like Pompeii. The NT refers to a number of sicknesses, and the word “physician” occurs several times in the Gospels (Mt 9:12; Mk 2:17; 5:26; Lk 4:23; 5:31; 8:43). Luke is given special mention as a beloved physician (Col 4:14). Physicians were not always able to effect a cure (Mk 5:26; Lk 8:43), but Jesus the healer succeeded where others failed.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHYSICIAN<\/h3>\n<p>One trained in medicine. The physician tended to and repaired wounds and administered medicines to the sick. In early Israel the diagnosis and treatment of sick people was officially the concern of the priests, although many nonprofessional people practiced the healing art in the small towns and villages. King Asa sought their help for his feet (2 Chr 16:12). Jeremiah inquired about physicians in Gilead (Jer 8:22). Job complained that his friends were useless physicians (Jb 13:4). Scientific medicine and the careful training of physicians awaited the rise of Greek medicine, which by NT times saw medical schools established in various countries in the Greco-Roman world. Remarkable collections of surgical instruments have come from places like Pompeii. The NT refers to a number of sicknesses, and the word “physician” occurs several times in the Gospels (Mt 9:12; Mk 2:17; 5:26; Lk 4:23; 5:31; 8:43). Luke is given special mention as a beloved physician (Col 4:14). Physicians were not always able to effect a cure (Mk 5:26; Lk 8:43), but Jesus the healer succeeded where others failed.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHYSICIAN One trained in medicine. The physician tended to and repaired wounds and administered medicines to the sick. In early Israel the diagnosis and treatment of sick people was officially the concern of the priests, although many nonprofessional people practiced the healing art in the small towns and villages. King Asa sought their help for his feet (2 Chr 16:12). Jeremiah inquired about physicians in Gilead (Jer 8:22). Job complained that his friends were useless physicians (Jb 13:4). S...","summary_en":"PHYSICIAN One trained in medicine. The physician tended to and repaired wounds and administered medicines to the sick. In early Israel the diagnosis and treatment of sick people was officially the concern of the priests, although many nonprofessional people practiced the healing art in the small towns and villages. King Asa sought their help for his feet (2 Chr 16:12). Jeremiah inquired about physicians in Gilead (Jer 8:22). Job complained that his friends were useless physicians (Jb 13:4). S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35496,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sin","title_en":"Sin","content_ro":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","summary_en":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55176,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","summary_en":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82802,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","summary_en":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110428,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","summary_en":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138054,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:17<\/strong> Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a <em>doctor<\/em> and <em>sinners<\/em> to <em>sick people<\/em>. Salvation is for those who <em>know they are sinners,<\/em> not those who <em>think they are righteous<\/em> (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","summary_en":"2:17 Jesus answered his opponents with a well-known proverb, comparing himself to a doctor and sinners to sick people. Salvation is for those who know they are sinners, not those who think they are righteous (Luke 16:15; 18:9; Rom 3:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":42423,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70049,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97675,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125301,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2419,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apothegm*","title_en":"Apothegm*","content_ro":"<h3>APOTHEGM*<\/h3>\n<p>Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, and in the correction of false teachings, they were of great interest to the early church.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOTHEGM*<\/h3>\n<p>Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, and in the correction of false teachings, they were of great interest to the early church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOTHEGM* Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, a...","summary_en":"APOTHEGM* Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, a...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9643,"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":55177,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","summary_en":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82803,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","summary_en":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110429,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","summary_en":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138055,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:18","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:18-22<\/strong> This controversy deals with <em>fasting<\/em><em>,<\/em> which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","summary_en":"2:18-22 This controversy deals with fasting, which Jesus did not practice with his disciples. The Pharisees regularly fasted two days a week, on Mondays and Thursdays (Luke 18:12), and Jews often fasted when mourning or specially seeking the Lord’s favor (Lev 16:29-31; 1 Sam 31:13; 2 Sam 1:12; 12:21-23; Ezra 8:23; Esth 4:3; Matt 6:16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65330,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92956,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120582,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148208,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":21888,"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":55178,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","summary_en":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82804,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","summary_en":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110430,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","summary_en":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138056,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:19-20<\/strong> Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was <em>taken away<\/em> by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","summary_en":"2:19-20 Jesus was like a groom at his wedding, so fasting was inappropriate. It was a time for celebration (Luke 15:23-25, 32). The disciples would fast when Jesus was taken away by death (see Acts 13:2-3; 14:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65331,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92957,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120583,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148209,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":12852,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fullness","title_en":"Fullness","content_ro":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","summary_en":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55179,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","summary_en":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82805,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","summary_en":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110431,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","summary_en":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138057,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:21-22<\/strong> <em>Old<\/em> customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the <em>new<\/em> arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken <em>new patch<\/em> sewn on <em>old clothing<\/em> will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle <em>old wineskins<\/em> will burst when <em>new wine<\/em> ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","summary_en":"2:21-22 Old customs of the old covenant are incompatible with the new arrival of God’s Kingdom. Common experience shows that an unshrunken new patch sewn on old clothing will tear the old cloth as it shrinks. Similarly, brittle old wineskins will burst when new wine ferments in them. Jesus’ meaning was that the fasting of the old cannot mix with the feasting of the new.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":22867,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Leather","title_en":"Leather","content_ro":"<h3>LEATHER<\/h3>\n<p>Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48).<\/p>\n<p>Some household utensils were made of leather. The most common was the container for holding liquids, such as milk (Jgs 4:19), wine (Mk 2:22), and water (Gn 21:14). Oil, extracted from olives, then purified and refined, was also stored in skins, until required for cooking, toiletry, or medicinal purposes, or as fuel for lamps. In all probability leather was used for beds, chairs, and other household articles. There is no reference to leather being used to make tents, but animal skins were employed in the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 25:5; Nm 4:8). Clearly, the references are to tanned skins. Their use would ensure that the roof was waterproof.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is silent concerning the use of leather for making armor or weapons; however, it would be a natural choice for helmets and shields for defense, slings for offense, and quivers to hold arrows. Rubbing oil into the surface of shields, presumably to keep them from becoming brittle and therefore useless, is referred to in 2 Samuel 1:21 and Isaiah 21:5 and points to their being made of leather. A painting in the tomb of an Egyptian nobleman from about 1900 <span>BC<\/span> supplements the meager knowledge that the Bible provides concerning the use of leather in OT times. In the painting the men wear sandals and the women boots. A leather water bottle is strapped to one man’s back. Another, an archer, carries a quiver on his back. The asses are carrying objects that have been identified as two pairs of goatskin bellows.<\/p>\n<p>Leather was used extensively as writing material, but early on almost wholly in Egypt. There, parchment, also derived from animal hides, has a very ancient history. The difference between leather and parchment is that the former is tanned, whereas the latter is produced by treating the skins with solutions of lime, salt, or dyes, scraping off the hair on one side and the flesh on the other, stretching and drying them in a frame, then rubbing them with a pumice stone to produce smooth surfaces on both sides. The use of prepared skins for writing material was known before 2000 <span>BC<\/span> in Egypt, but according to Pliny, the term “parchment” did not come into use until about 160 <span>BC<\/span> in other areas.<\/p>\n<p>No leather documents have been recovered from Assyria or Babylonia, probably because leather was used much less extensively there than elsewhere in the ancient East. Middle East literary allusions point to its having come into use there at a later period. The term “parchment” is not found before the Persian period, and the phrase “written on parchment” does not occur before the early years of the Seleucids (312–64 <span>BC<\/span>). Even then papyrus was the chief writing material.<\/p>\n<p>Another leather product, vellum, is fine parchment made from calf, kid, lamb, or antelope skins. In Rome, from the first century <span>BC<\/span> through the second century <span>AD<\/span>, vellum was in restricted use. Not until the third and fourth centuries did vellum prevail. It was at this time that the celebrated Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus were produced. The whole Bible now could be gathered into a single codex, which was in the form of a modern book with folded sheets, whereas previously a set of from 30 to 40 rolls of papyrus would be required for the Bible. Vellum also allowed for the palimpsest, from which the original writing could be erased and written upon again.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT leather or skins are not mentioned in connection with writing. Books in roll form are mentioned in Psalm 40:7, Jeremiah 36, and Ezekiel 2:9–3:3, but these were probably papyrus. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest reference to Jews using parchment or leather as writing material is found in Josephus, toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. However, we now know that around 100 <span>BC<\/span> parchment was used by Jews. The Talmud requires the Law to be written on skins of clean animals, a regulation that still stands for books to be used in the synagogue, but it is not certain that this points to an ancient tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written on leather. For example, the great scroll of Isaiah, written about 100 <span>BC<\/span>, consists of 17 sheets sewn together into a length of almost 23 feet (7 meters). The autographs of the NT were probably written on papyrus. Certainly John wrote his second letter on papyrus (2 Jn 1:12) within the last quarter of the first century.<\/p>\n<p>Tanning is not mentioned in the OT, but it is implied in Exodus 25:5 and Leviticus 13:48. The possible use of skins of unclean animals and the constant contact with dead bodies made tanning an unclean trade, and it was forbidden in the city. However, the preparation of skins for parchment was considered an honorable calling.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Letter Writing, Ancient; Writing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEATHER<\/h3>\n<p>Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48).<\/p>\n<p>Some household utensils were made of leather. The most common was the container for holding liquids, such as milk (Jgs 4:19), wine (Mk 2:22), and water (Gn 21:14). Oil, extracted from olives, then purified and refined, was also stored in skins, until required for cooking, toiletry, or medicinal purposes, or as fuel for lamps. In all probability leather was used for beds, chairs, and other household articles. There is no reference to leather being used to make tents, but animal skins were employed in the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 25:5; Nm 4:8). Clearly, the references are to tanned skins. Their use would ensure that the roof was waterproof.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible is silent concerning the use of leather for making armor or weapons; however, it would be a natural choice for helmets and shields for defense, slings for offense, and quivers to hold arrows. Rubbing oil into the surface of shields, presumably to keep them from becoming brittle and therefore useless, is referred to in 2 Samuel 1:21 and Isaiah 21:5 and points to their being made of leather. A painting in the tomb of an Egyptian nobleman from about 1900 <span>BC<\/span> supplements the meager knowledge that the Bible provides concerning the use of leather in OT times. In the painting the men wear sandals and the women boots. A leather water bottle is strapped to one man’s back. Another, an archer, carries a quiver on his back. The asses are carrying objects that have been identified as two pairs of goatskin bellows.<\/p>\n<p>Leather was used extensively as writing material, but early on almost wholly in Egypt. There, parchment, also derived from animal hides, has a very ancient history. The difference between leather and parchment is that the former is tanned, whereas the latter is produced by treating the skins with solutions of lime, salt, or dyes, scraping off the hair on one side and the flesh on the other, stretching and drying them in a frame, then rubbing them with a pumice stone to produce smooth surfaces on both sides. The use of prepared skins for writing material was known before 2000 <span>BC<\/span> in Egypt, but according to Pliny, the term “parchment” did not come into use until about 160 <span>BC<\/span> in other areas.<\/p>\n<p>No leather documents have been recovered from Assyria or Babylonia, probably because leather was used much less extensively there than elsewhere in the ancient East. Middle East literary allusions point to its having come into use there at a later period. The term “parchment” is not found before the Persian period, and the phrase “written on parchment” does not occur before the early years of the Seleucids (312–64 <span>BC<\/span>). Even then papyrus was the chief writing material.<\/p>\n<p>Another leather product, vellum, is fine parchment made from calf, kid, lamb, or antelope skins. In Rome, from the first century <span>BC<\/span> through the second century <span>AD<\/span>, vellum was in restricted use. Not until the third and fourth centuries did vellum prevail. It was at this time that the celebrated Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus were produced. The whole Bible now could be gathered into a single codex, which was in the form of a modern book with folded sheets, whereas previously a set of from 30 to 40 rolls of papyrus would be required for the Bible. Vellum also allowed for the palimpsest, from which the original writing could be erased and written upon again.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT leather or skins are not mentioned in connection with writing. Books in roll form are mentioned in Psalm 40:7, Jeremiah 36, and Ezekiel 2:9–3:3, but these were probably papyrus. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the earliest reference to Jews using parchment or leather as writing material is found in Josephus, toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. However, we now know that around 100 <span>BC<\/span> parchment was used by Jews. The Talmud requires the Law to be written on skins of clean animals, a regulation that still stands for books to be used in the synagogue, but it is not certain that this points to an ancient tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written on leather. For example, the great scroll of Isaiah, written about 100 <span>BC<\/span>, consists of 17 sheets sewn together into a length of almost 23 feet (7 meters). The autographs of the NT were probably written on papyrus. Certainly John wrote his second letter on papyrus (2 Jn 1:12) within the last quarter of the first century.<\/p>\n<p>Tanning is not mentioned in the OT, but it is implied in Exodus 25:5 and Leviticus 13:48. The possible use of skins of unclean animals and the constant contact with dead bodies made tanning an unclean trade, and it was forbidden in the city. However, the preparation of skins for parchment was considered an honorable calling.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Letter Writing, Ancient; Writing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEATHER Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48)...","summary_en":"LEATHER Prepared animal hide, used extensively in Bible times for a wide variety of purposes. It was used as clothing in early times (Gn 3:21). At the beginning of the period of the prophets, their raiment, made from animal skins, became a means of identifying them (2 Kgs 1:8; Zec 13:4). Elijah’s mantle (1 Kgs 19:13, 19; 2 Kgs 2:8, 13-14) is described in the Greek OT as sheepskin. Animal skins were also used to make shoes (Ez 16:10), girdles (Mt 3:4), and other articles of clothing (Lv 13:48)...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":42050,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69676,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97302,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124928,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Pharisees","title_en":"The Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Pharisees<\/h3>\n<p>The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the <em>hasidim<\/em> (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obedient Jews. They taught strict adherence to the law, not only the written law of Moses (<em>torah<\/em>), but also the oral traditions which they claimed Moses had passed down to them. Their goal was to defend the written law against any possible infringement. They were God-fearing and law-abiding people. They were known for passing their interpretations from generation to generation by word of mouth, establishing an oral tradition concerning legal matters. They made the law applicable by extracting from it specific guidelines for many possible situations. They argued that if the law were obeyed by all, the nation would be purged of sin and God would establish his Kingdom over all the nations. This gave their concern for obedience a goal in the future. The traditions of the Pharisees developed into the rabbinic writings known as the <em>Mishnah<\/em> and the <em>Talmud<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>Although the Pharisees were small in number, their influence on Israel was widespread (see Matt 15:12-14; see also Josephus, <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.5). The primary influence of the Pharisees was in the local synagogue communities, while the Sadducees were more influential in the worship at the Temple in Jerusalem and in the Sanhedrin, the Jewish high council.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees had a strong belief in the resurrection of the dead (see Acts 23:6-8). After the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Pharisees provided leadership and direction for the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus often came into conflict with the Pharisees, accusing them of hypocrisy and of elevating human rules over God’s righteous standards. Jesus opposed the Pharisees because they were leading people away from God’s plan for redemption. They were the theological shepherds of Israel, but Jesus castigated them as hypocrites for their perversions of doctrine and practice (see Matt 23). And the Pharisees were antagonistic toward Jesus, rejecting both him and his work, largely because of his shocking disregard of their traditions (see e.g., Matt 15:1-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 5:20; 9:10-14, 34; 12:1-14, 22-24, 38-40; 15:1-14; 16:1-12; 19:3; 21:45; 22:15, 34; 23:1-7, 13-31; 27:62-64; Mark 2:23-25; 3:1-6; 7:1-13; 8:11-12; 12:13-17; Luke 5:17-21, 29-32; 6:6-11; 7:28-30, 36-49; 11:37-54; 12:1-3; 13:31; 14:1-6; 15:1-2; 16:13-15; 17:20-21; 18:9-14; 19:38-40; John 1:24-25; 3:1; 7:31-32, 45-52; 8:3-10, 13; 9:13-34, 40; 11:46-57; 12:17-19, 42; 18:3; Acts 5:27-40; 15:5; 23:6-10; 26:4-5; Phil 3:5-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","summary_en":"The Pharisees The Pharisees were one of three major Jewish sects, along with the Sadducees and the Essenes. The Pharisees comprised a non-political lay movement within Judaism. They arose from the hasidim (pious ones), who opposed the syncretizing (combining together) of Greek culture and religion with Judaism in the second century BC. The Pharisees attempted, by rigorous examination of the details of the Old Testament law, to make the law accessible and practical to people seeking to be obed...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27641,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nob","title_en":"Nob","content_ro":"<h3>NOB<\/h3>\n<p>City located on the eastern slopes of Mt Scopus opposite the Mt of Olives and northeast of Jerusalem. An important religious center, 86 priests resided there, as did the ephod (1 Sm 22:13-20). Nob was the central sanctuary in which the priests served who had fled from Shiloh when the Philistines destroyed the sanctuary there.<\/p>\n<p>The episode of David and the priests of Nob (1 Sm 21:2-7) attests to the antiquity of the details of the table and the bread of the presence (Ex 37:10-16). Jesus cites David’s hunger as a just reason for breaking the ritual laws governing Sabbath observance (Mk 2:23-28). David, fleeing from Saul and needing food, went into the sanctuary at Nob and took the loaves laid out each Sabbath as an offering to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Ahimelech, a descendant of Eli and leader of the priests of Nob, gave the showbread to David, along with the sword with which Goliath had been slain. This incensed Saul, who ordered the murder of Ahimelech and the massacre of all the priests and citizens of Nob (1 Sm 22:6-23), an act that sealed the fate of the king. Abiathar, a priest who evaded the massacre, played a prominent role in the reign of David until Solomon eventually removed him from his position (1 Kgs 2:26-27). The phrase “where God was worshiped” may refer to the sanctuary at Nob (2 Sm 15:32).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NOB<\/h3>\n<p>City located on the eastern slopes of Mt Scopus opposite the Mt of Olives and northeast of Jerusalem. An important religious center, 86 priests resided there, as did the ephod (1 Sm 22:13-20). Nob was the central sanctuary in which the priests served who had fled from Shiloh when the Philistines destroyed the sanctuary there.<\/p>\n<p>The episode of David and the priests of Nob (1 Sm 21:2-7) attests to the antiquity of the details of the table and the bread of the presence (Ex 37:10-16). Jesus cites David’s hunger as a just reason for breaking the ritual laws governing Sabbath observance (Mk 2:23-28). David, fleeing from Saul and needing food, went into the sanctuary at Nob and took the loaves laid out each Sabbath as an offering to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Ahimelech, a descendant of Eli and leader of the priests of Nob, gave the showbread to David, along with the sword with which Goliath had been slain. This incensed Saul, who ordered the murder of Ahimelech and the massacre of all the priests and citizens of Nob (1 Sm 22:6-23), an act that sealed the fate of the king. Abiathar, a priest who evaded the massacre, played a prominent role in the reign of David until Solomon eventually removed him from his position (1 Kgs 2:26-27). The phrase “where God was worshiped” may refer to the sanctuary at Nob (2 Sm 15:32).<\/p>","summary_ro":"NOB City located on the eastern slopes of Mt Scopus opposite the Mt of Olives and northeast of Jerusalem. An important religious center, 86 priests resided there, as did the ephod (1 Sm 22:13-20). Nob was the central sanctuary in which the priests served who had fled from Shiloh when the Philistines destroyed the sanctuary there. The episode of David and the priests of Nob (1 Sm 21:2-7) attests to the antiquity of the details of the table and the bread of the presence (Ex 37:10-16). Jesus cit...","summary_en":"NOB City located on the eastern slopes of Mt Scopus opposite the Mt of Olives and northeast of Jerusalem. An important religious center, 86 priests resided there, as did the ephod (1 Sm 22:13-20). Nob was the central sanctuary in which the priests served who had fled from Shiloh when the Philistines destroyed the sanctuary there. The episode of David and the priests of Nob (1 Sm 21:2-7) attests to the antiquity of the details of the table and the bread of the presence (Ex 37:10-16). Jesus cit...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33434,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55180,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","summary_en":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82806,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","summary_en":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110432,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","summary_en":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138058,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:23-28<\/strong> In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking <em>grain<\/em> by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on <em>the Sabbath<\/em><em>,<\/em> which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","summary_en":"2:23-28 In this controversy, Jesus and his disciples are accused of breaking the Sabbath (Exod 20:8-11). Picking grain by hand in another person’s field was lawful (Deut 23:25). The charge was that by rubbing the chaff from the kernels, the disciples were working on the Sabbath, which was forbidden (Exod 34:21).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67651,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95277,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122903,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150529,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest","title_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Sabbath Rest<\/h3>\n<p>The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience.<\/p>\n<p>But what is this “rest” they failed to enter, which still remains for the people of God (Heb 4:1-3)? The author of Hebrews clearly had more in mind than the physical land of Canaan as the place of “special rest” (4:8-9). Genesis 2:2 speaks of God’s rest as something that he prepared from the foundation of the world (Heb 4:3-4). God’s rest relates to ceasing from one’s own work as God did from his (4:10). This rest can be entered by those who “hear his voice,” don’t harden their hearts, and believe the Good News (4:1-3, 7).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the Day of Atonement is called a “Sabbath day of complete rest” (Lev 16:29-31). On that day, people ceased completely from their own work. In the new covenant, Jesus as our Great High Priest has offered a once-for-all sacrifice that decisively dealt with sin (9:7-28). He has provided the ultimate atoning sacrifice, and he thus offers people a spiritual rest, which they enter by believing this Good News.<\/p>\n<p>God’s rest that is available through Jesus has two aspects. First, those who believe in him have ceased from their own works—that is, they no longer work for God’s acceptance, but they trust in Christ’s finished work (Eph 2:8-9) and enjoy the blessings of peace with God (John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 2 Cor 5:19-21). Second, they look forward to an eternal life of rest and enjoyment in God’s presence (Isa 26:19; Rev 14:13). Jesus Christ gives complete and perfect rest (Matt 11:28-30).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:1-3; Exod 16:21-29; 20:8-11; 31:13-16; Lev 16:29-31; Isa 52:7; 54:13-14; 56:2, 4; 57:2, 21; 58:13; Ezek 20:20; Matt 11:28-30; Mark 2:23-28; Luke 8:48; John 14:27; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:19-21; Eph 2:17; Col 1:20; 2:16; 3:15; Heb 4:1-11; 2 Pet 1:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","summary_en":"God’s Sabbath Rest The concept of God’s Sabbath rest, as found in Hebrews 4:1-11, has been a theological puzzle for commentators. The notion carries various connotations from the Old Testament, including the Promised Land as a place to rest from slavery and wandering and the Sabbath day as a weekly day of rest. In Hebrews 3:7-19, the author expounds on Psalm 95:7-11 and offers the wilderness wanderers as an example of those who failed to enter God’s rest because of their disobedience. But wha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":5670,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bread of the Presence","title_en":"Bread of the Presence","content_ro":"<h3>BREAD OF THE PRESENCE<\/h3>\n<p>Loaves of bread placed on a special table in the sanctuary or Holy Place of the tabernacle and later in the temple. Two other terms in the OT are used to describe the “bread of the Presence,” which means bread that has been set before the Lord’s face (Ex 25:23, 30; 35:13; 39:36; 1 Kgs 7:48; 2 Chr 4:19). The term “showbread” (<span>kjv<\/span> “shewbread”) refers to the arrangement of the bread in rows on the table (1 Chr 9:32; 23:29; 28:16; 2 Chr 2:4; 13:11; 29:18).<\/p>\n<p>Although the table of showbread, the altar of incense, and the golden lampstand were not in the Holy of Holies, they were nevertheless considered to be in the presence of God. As an offering placed before the presence of God, the loaves were considered holy and could be eaten only by priests. Later in Israel’s history, provision for offering the bread of the Presence as well as other temple services was financed by a tax of one-third shekel upon all citizens (Neh 10:32-33).<\/p>\n<p>The bread of the Presence consisted of 12 very large loaves, each made of one-fifth ephah of fine flour. Since an ephah was just over a bushel, two and a half bushels (30.3 liters) of finely ground wheat were required to make the 12 loaves. They were sprinkled with frankincense, arranged in two rows, the one leaning against the other, and placed on the table of showbread (Lv 24:5-9). Arranged in that way, the bread became an “offering of food” to the Lord. The loaves were changed weekly on the Sabbath day.<\/p>\n<p>The bread of the Presence is featured in one incident recalled in the NT. The tabernacle was at Nob when David was fleeing from the presence of King Saul. David went to Ahimelech, the priest, in search of food (1 Sm 21:1-6). Ahimelech had only the showbread, which he agreed to share with David’s men, provided they had been sexually continent for a period of time before their eating. Jesus later referred to the incident as a parallel to his own ministry of supplying the needs of those who followed him (Mt 12:1-8; Mk 2:25-26; Lk 6:1-5). As God’s anointed, David and his men were permitted to eat the holy bread. Likewise Jesus, God’s anointed one, provided for the needs of others in spite of the Sabbath regulations.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BREAD OF THE PRESENCE<\/h3>\n<p>Loaves of bread placed on a special table in the sanctuary or Holy Place of the tabernacle and later in the temple. Two other terms in the OT are used to describe the “bread of the Presence,” which means bread that has been set before the Lord’s face (Ex 25:23, 30; 35:13; 39:36; 1 Kgs 7:48; 2 Chr 4:19). The term “showbread” (<span>kjv<\/span> “shewbread”) refers to the arrangement of the bread in rows on the table (1 Chr 9:32; 23:29; 28:16; 2 Chr 2:4; 13:11; 29:18).<\/p>\n<p>Although the table of showbread, the altar of incense, and the golden lampstand were not in the Holy of Holies, they were nevertheless considered to be in the presence of God. As an offering placed before the presence of God, the loaves were considered holy and could be eaten only by priests. Later in Israel’s history, provision for offering the bread of the Presence as well as other temple services was financed by a tax of one-third shekel upon all citizens (Neh 10:32-33).<\/p>\n<p>The bread of the Presence consisted of 12 very large loaves, each made of one-fifth ephah of fine flour. Since an ephah was just over a bushel, two and a half bushels (30.3 liters) of finely ground wheat were required to make the 12 loaves. They were sprinkled with frankincense, arranged in two rows, the one leaning against the other, and placed on the table of showbread (Lv 24:5-9). Arranged in that way, the bread became an “offering of food” to the Lord. The loaves were changed weekly on the Sabbath day.<\/p>\n<p>The bread of the Presence is featured in one incident recalled in the NT. The tabernacle was at Nob when David was fleeing from the presence of King Saul. David went to Ahimelech, the priest, in search of food (1 Sm 21:1-6). Ahimelech had only the showbread, which he agreed to share with David’s men, provided they had been sexually continent for a period of time before their eating. Jesus later referred to the incident as a parallel to his own ministry of supplying the needs of those who followed him (Mt 12:1-8; Mk 2:25-26; Lk 6:1-5). As God’s anointed, David and his men were permitted to eat the holy bread. Likewise Jesus, God’s anointed one, provided for the needs of others in spite of the Sabbath regulations.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BREAD OF THE PRESENCE Loaves of bread placed on a special table in the sanctuary or Holy Place of the tabernacle and later in the temple. Two other terms in the OT are used to describe the “bread of the Presence,” which means bread that has been set before the Lord’s face (Ex 25:23, 30; 35:13; 39:36; 1 Kgs 7:48; 2 Chr 4:19). The term “showbread” (kjv “shewbread”) refers to the arrangement of the bread in rows on the table (1 Chr 9:32; 23:29; 28:16; 2 Chr 2:4; 13:11; 29:18). Although the table...","summary_en":"BREAD OF THE PRESENCE Loaves of bread placed on a special table in the sanctuary or Holy Place of the tabernacle and later in the temple. Two other terms in the OT are used to describe the “bread of the Presence,” which means bread that has been set before the Lord’s face (Ex 25:23, 30; 35:13; 39:36; 1 Kgs 7:48; 2 Chr 4:19). The term “showbread” (kjv “shewbread”) refers to the arrangement of the bread in rows on the table (1 Chr 9:32; 23:29; 28:16; 2 Chr 2:4; 13:11; 29:18). Although the table...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55181,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","summary_en":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82807,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","summary_en":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110433,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","summary_en":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138059,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:25-26<\/strong> Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King <em>David<\/em> (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate <em>the sacred loaves<\/em>—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they <em>broke the law<\/em> (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","summary_en":"2:25-26 Jesus countered with reference to an incident in the life of King David (1 Sam 21). When David and his followers ate the sacred loaves—the twelve loaves in the Tabernacle that only priests were allowed to eat—they broke the law (see Lev 24:5-9). But deeper principles were at work (Mark 2:27-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":128,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Abiathar","title_en":"Abiathar","content_ro":"<h3>ABIATHAR<\/h3>\n<p>One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in determining the will of God (1 Sm 23:6, 9-11; 30:7-8). Abiathar was one of the first persons from Saul’s administration to support David. His support was formidable because he represented the priesthood of the old tribal league of the line of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>During the last days of David’s kingship, his sons struggled for the throne. The two major rivals were Adonijah and Solomon. Abiathar the high priest supported Adonijah’s claim to the throne, probably because Adonijah was David’s oldest living heir and because David’s general Joab, one of the strongest men in the kingdom, supported Adonijah (1 Kgs 1:5-7). Zadok supported Solomon, who actually succeeded David on the throne. Having fallen out of favor with the new king, Abiathar was banished to his estate in Anathoth (1 Kgs 2:26-27), a village about four miles (6.4 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n<p>The relationship of Abiathar to Ahimelech is confusing. Ahimelech could have been the name of both Abiathar’s father (1 Sm 22:20; 23:6) and son (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 18:16; 24:6). If each of the references was to the same Ahimelech, then the names were reversed in the later passages. In the NT, Abiathar is mentioned as the high priest when David came to Nob needing food and weapons (Mk 2:26). The OT account says that Ahimelech was the priest at that time (1 Sm 21:1-2). The apparent discrepancy may have resulted from a copyist’s error or from the fact that Abiathar as high priest was more prominent than Ahimelech.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ABIATHAR<\/h3>\n<p>One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in determining the will of God (1 Sm 23:6, 9-11; 30:7-8). Abiathar was one of the first persons from Saul’s administration to support David. His support was formidable because he represented the priesthood of the old tribal league of the line of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>During the last days of David’s kingship, his sons struggled for the throne. The two major rivals were Adonijah and Solomon. Abiathar the high priest supported Adonijah’s claim to the throne, probably because Adonijah was David’s oldest living heir and because David’s general Joab, one of the strongest men in the kingdom, supported Adonijah (1 Kgs 1:5-7). Zadok supported Solomon, who actually succeeded David on the throne. Having fallen out of favor with the new king, Abiathar was banished to his estate in Anathoth (1 Kgs 2:26-27), a village about four miles (6.4 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. <\/p>\n<p>The relationship of Abiathar to Ahimelech is confusing. Ahimelech could have been the name of both Abiathar’s father (1 Sm 22:20; 23:6) and son (2 Sm 8:17; 1 Chr 18:16; 24:6). If each of the references was to the same Ahimelech, then the names were reversed in the later passages. In the NT, Abiathar is mentioned as the high priest when David came to Nob needing food and weapons (Mk 2:26). The OT account says that Ahimelech was the priest at that time (1 Sm 21:1-2). The apparent discrepancy may have resulted from a copyist’s error or from the fact that Abiathar as high priest was more prominent than Ahimelech.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ABIATHAR One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem. Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in deter...","summary_en":"ABIATHAR One of two high priests during the reign of King David. The other high priest was Zadok, who evidently was appointed by David after his conquest of Jerusalem. Only Abiathar escaped when the priestly families at Nob were massacred at the instigation of King Saul. The priests of Nob had given food and Goliath’s sword to David during his escape from the wrath of Saul, thus earning Saul’s hatred (1 Sm 21–22). When Abiathar joined David he brought the ephod, which David then used in deter...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16913,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"House of God","title_en":"House of God","content_ro":"<h3>HOUSE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s ascension, the church viewed itself as the house of God (1 Cor 3:9; Heb 3:6; 1 Pt 2:5; 4:17). God no longer dwelt in buildings made by human hands but in the lives of those who confess Jesus as Lord.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOUSE OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s ascension, the church viewed itself as the house of God (1 Cor 3:9; Heb 3:6; 1 Pt 2:5; 4:17). God no longer dwelt in buildings made by human hands but in the lives of those who confess Jesus as Lord.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Tabernacle; Temple.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOUSE OF GOD Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21). In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s as...","summary_en":"HOUSE OF GOD Common phrase used in the ancient Near Eastern world for a structure used to accommodate a deity or his servants. In the OT it referred to the tabernacle (Dt 23:18; 1 Chr 6:31-32), Solomon’s temple (1 Kgs 8:11-20; 12:27; Jer 20:1), national shrines, or pagan temples (Jgs 9:4; 2 Kgs 10:21). In NT times the OT custom of referring to the temple as the “house of God” was still employed (Mt 12:4; Mk 2:26; 11:17; Lk 6:4; Jn 2:16-17), but with some significant changes. After Christ’s as...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31347,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Priests and Levites","title_en":"Priests and Levites","content_ro":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PRIESTS AND LEVITES<\/h3>\n<p>Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levites fulfilled a variety of essentially religious duties and were equivalent approximately to the clergy in modern times. They were professional men and were supported for their full-time religious work.<\/p>\n<p>The role of the priesthood may be seen most clearly in the context of Israelite religion as a whole. At the heart of religion was a relationship with God; to be an Israelite or a Jew was to know and maintain a continuous relationship with the living God. This relationship found its outward expression in a variety of contexts: the covenant, the temple, worship, and every facet of daily life. Thus religion, understood as a relationship, had two perspectives: the relationship with God and that with fellow human beings. It had both a personal and a communal dimension to it. The priests were the guardians and servants of this life of relationship, which was at the heart of OT religion; all their functions can best be understood within the context of a relationship between God and Israel. The prophets, too, were servants of the covenant relationship. While the priests functioned as the normal servants of religion, the prophets’ role was more that of calling a delinquent people back to the relationship with God in times of crisis.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, there are frequent references to both priests and Levites; in a number of biblical texts, however, the distinction is not clear (see, e.g., Dt 18:1-8). From the scholarly point of view, the precise relationship between priests and Levites is a continuing problem that has not yet been fully resolved. In general terms, only the sons of Aaron were to assume the role of priests; all other Levites would have religious functions, though technically they would not be priests. While this distinction is clear in most biblical texts, in others there is lack of certainty and clarity. It is clear, however, that <em>priests<\/em> (Levites descended from Aaron) and <em>Levites<\/em> (other than the descendants of Aaron) all had professional religious duties to perform. The precise nature of those duties varied from time to time in the course of Israel’s history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>• The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>• The Priests<\/p>\n<p>• The Levites<\/p>\n<p>• The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheOriginsofthePriesthood\">The Origins of the Priesthood<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood in Israel began during the time of Moses and Aaron. The exodus from Egypt was not only the liberation of a group of Hebrew slaves but also the birth of the nation of Israel. The nation that was born in the exodus was given its constitution in the covenant of Sinai. The law of this covenant established the foundations and origins of Israelite priesthood. It provides insight into the three basic categories to be considered: the high priest, the priests, and the Levites.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHighPriest\">The High Priest<\/p>\n<p>Any large and complex organization requires a head or leader, and this was true also of the Hebrew priesthood (though in its early days it was a small organization). The covenant was established through Moses, the prophet, through whom God gave the offer and substance of the covenant relationship; religious life within the covenant was to be the primary responsibility of Aaron, who was the first and chief priest.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of Israel’s priesthood, it is probable that the high priest’s office was relatively informal; he was chief or leader among his fellow priests. The office was significant, nevertheless, and involved a special ritual of investiture, special clothing, and certain special responsibilities. While the high priest’s duties were similar in principle to those of other priests, he had certain exclusive responsibilities. To some extent, his duties were administrative, pertaining to all the priests of whom he had charge. But his position was more weighty than that of an administrator; just as all priests were the servants and guardians of the covenant relationship, so the high priest was chief servant and chief guardian. In his hands rested spiritual responsibility for the entire people of God, and therein lay the true honor and gravity of his position.<\/p>\n\n<p>This spiritual seniority of the high priest is seen most clearly in certain tasks he undertook within Israel’s life of worship. The clearest example may be seen in the annual observation of the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). On that day alone, the high priest entered the Holy of Holies and, standing before the “mercy seat,” he sought God’s forgiveness and mercy for the whole nation of Israel (Lv 16:1-19). It is in that ceremony that Israel’s covenant faith is seen most clearly. Israel’s religion was one of relationship with a holy God, and human evil disrupted that relationship. While all worship and sacrifices throughout the year were concerned with the continuation of the relationship, the Day of Atonement was the most solemn day of the year, in which the attention of all the people focused upon the meaning of their existence. Life held meaning only if the relationship with God could be maintained; the high priest had the great honor and heavy burden of seeking God’s mercy for all Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The special clothing worn by the high priest was symbolic of the nature and importance of his office; although all the symbolism cannot be determined, some of it is made clear in the biblical text. There are three particular themes in the symbolism. The first is beauty. The sense of beauty emerges from the quality and design of all the items of clothing, together with the use of color and precious stones. But beauty is dominant in the breastplate; the Hebrew word translated approximately as “breastplate” has as its basic sense “beauty” or “excellence.” The clothing symbolizes beauty, while beauty describes the office; the two other themes associated with the symbolism bring out the excellence of the office.<\/p>\n<p>The second theme is the role of the priest as representative of Israel before God. This essential dimension of the office of the high priest is explicitly identified in the names of the tribes of Israel in the two onyx stones in the ephod, and in the 12 precious stones attached to the breastplate. The high priest entered God’s presence to seek deliverance from God’s judgment (the breastplate is identified with judgment; Ex 28:15) for his people and in order to keep the people constantly in God’s remembrance (v 12), as symbolized by the two onyx stones. The third theme is the role of high priest as the representative of God to Israel. This dimension of the office is seen in the Urim and Thummim, kept in the breastpiece, by means of which God made known his will to Israel. The high priest, Aaron, fully robed, was a splendid figure, and the splendor of his garments indicated the magnificence of the office with which he had been entrusted.<\/p>\n<p>The high priesthood was to be passed on within the family (for the high priest was expected to be a married man), although in later history the practice was not always adhered to. On Aaron’s death, the office passed to Eleazar, one of his four sons.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriests\">The Priests<\/p>\n<p>Priests took office not as the result of a particular vocation but by virtue of priestly descent. Thus the first priests were the four sons of Aaron: Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. These four were ordained at the same time that Aaron was ordained high priest (Ex 28:1). Like him, they had special clothing, which was basically similar, though it lacked the distinctive garments of the high priest (the special ephod, the breastpiece, and the crown). The priesthood would be passed down through their sons.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctity of the priestly office was such that it was preserved from degeneration through specific laws. A man must be a descendant of Aaron to be a priest, but he was also required to meet a variety of other qualifications. He would not marry a divorcée or a former prostitute (Lv 21:7). If he was afflicted by certain kinds of disease or congenital defects, he was barred from priestly office (e.g., blindness, lameness, mutilation, being a hunchback or dwarf; vv 16-23). The principle involved was similar to that applying to animals used in sacrifice—only those free from defect or blemish were suitable for divine service.<\/p>\n<p>In the earliest days of the priesthood there is some information provided in the biblical text concerning the specific duties of the priests. Eleazar had overall responsibility for the tabernacle and its offerings (Nm 4:16); assisted Moses in a number of duties, such as numbering the people and dividing the land (26:1-2; 32:2); and later served as an adviser to Joshua. Ithamar was responsible for the construction of the tabernacle (Ex 38:21) and supervised the families of the Gershonites and Merarites (Nm 4:28-33). Nadab and Abihu, however, died soon after their ordination as a result of a sinful act in their priestly duties (Lv 10:1-7), which may have been related in part to drunkenness (vv 8-9).<\/p>\n<p>Priestly duties, in general, fell into three areas (Dt 33:8-10). First, priests were responsible, in conjunction with the high priest, for declaring God’s will to the people. Second, they had responsibilities in religious education; they were to teach to Israel God’s ordinances and law (v 10). Third, they were to be the servants of the tabernacle, participating in Israel’s sacrifices and worship. There were a number of other duties that may have fallen to them, which they would have shared with the Levites in general.<\/p>\n<p>The priests, along with all other Levites, did not own any land, as did the other Israelite tribes. Their task was to be entirely in the direct service to God. The absence of land, however, meant that they could not support and feed themselves as could other men and women. Consequently, the law specified that they could be supported for their services by the people as a whole. They were to receive, from worshipers, portions of animals that were brought to the tabernacle, as well as corn, wine, oil, and wool.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLevites\">The Levites<\/p>\n<p>This term includes the priests, in a broad sense, for the sons of Aaron belonged to the tribe of Levi. For practical purposes, however, the Levites were those of the tribe other than the priests. The Levites also functioned in the service of the tabernacle, though they had a subordinate position. They, too, were professional men and were paid in money and in kind for their services. Though they did not inherit tribal territory of their own, there were a number of cities set aside for their use (Nm 35:1-8), and pasturelands were designated outside those cities for their livestock.<\/p>\n<p>The Levites were divided into three principal families, the descendants of Kohath, Gershon, and Merari (Nm 4). Each of these families had particular responsibilities with respect to the care and transport of the tabernacle. The sons of Kohath carried the tabernacle furniture (after it had been covered by the priests), the sons of Gershon cared for the coverings and screens, and the sons of Merari carried and erected the tabernacle’s frame. The priests, by contrast, were responsible for the transportation of the ark of the covenant. The role of each Levite, as servant of the tabernacle, was restricted; he undertook his professional duties between the ages of 25 and 50 (8:24-26).<\/p>\n<p>Although many of the duties of the Levites were of a mundane nature, they also had a very significant religious role. The law required that all the firstborn, including firstborn sons, be given to God, recalling the slaying of the firstborn at the exodus from Egypt. The Levites’ role in religion was that of being accepted by God in the place of the firstborn sons of Israel (Nm 3:11-13); their cattle, too, were accepted in place of the Israelites’ firstborn cattle. In the census taken in the time of Moses, the firstborn Israelites exceeded the number of the Levites, and a five-shekel redemption fee had to be paid into the priestly coffers for each person in excess (vv 40-51). The representative and substitutionary nature of the Levites can be seen in Israelite religion. Like the priests, they played a part in the larger activity of mediation between God and Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The law of Deuteronomy specifies a number of duties that may have fallen upon both priests and Levites (though the texts are ambiguous). These duties included participation in the activity of the law courts as judges, perhaps with special reference to religious crimes (Dt 17:8-9), taking care of the Book of the Law (v 18), controlling the lives and health of lepers (24:8), and participating directly in the conduct of covenant renewal ceremonies (27:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHistoryoftheInstitution\">The History of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>In theory, the covenant law of Moses determined the nature and course of the offices of priests and Levites for the future history of Israel. In practice, however, changing historical circumstances and changes in the shape of Israel’s religion and culture altered the shape of the priesthood and the role of the Levites from time to time. And even more significantly, the persons who held the offices shaped them and their effectiveness through their faithfulness or unfaithfulness.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood before the Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>In the time of Joshua, the priests continued to undertake their important task of carrying the ark of the covenant. The Levites assisted in the division and allocation of the newly acquired land among the Israelite tribes. In Joshua 21, there is a detailed list of the allocation of cities to both priests and Levites, in fulfillment of the earlier legislation. In the days of the settlement, beyond the Conquest, there is some evidence that the Levites took over the priestly duty of transporting the ark (1 Sm 6:15; 2 Sm 15:24).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of the book of Judges has recorded two stories that illuminate the lives of particular Levites. The first, the story of Micah (Jgs 17–18), describes the establishment of a local shrine in which Micah’s son was appointed as a priest (though he was not of Levite or Aaronic descent). Later, Micah hired an itinerant Levite to function as a priest in his shrine, though subsequently that Levite was persuaded to serve the tribe of Dan as a priest. It is difficult to fit the details of this story into the theoretical model of priests and Levites, though the story may illustrate the confused state of Israel’s religion at the time. What is particularly significant is that the role of the Levite-priest was primarily oracular (18:5-6). The second story in Judges is the rather horrifying account of a Levite and his concubine (ch 19). The story illustrates the moral decline and lack of law and order in Israel at the time, but it sheds little light on the role of the Levites.<\/p>\n<p>More information is provided about the priesthood during the 11th century <span>BC<\/span>, immediately before the establishment of the monarchy. The tabernacle (by now probably a semipermanent structure) and the ark of the covenant were located in Shiloh. The priest in charge of the sanctuary in Shiloh was Eli, who may have been a descendant of Aaron’s son Ithamar. His two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, also served as priests, indicating that the principle of family descent was still operative with respect to the priesthood. But although Eli was a faithful priest, his two sons abused the office.<\/p>\n<p>The precise role of Samuel in this period is unclear. He was primarily a judge and a prophet, but it is difficult to determine whether he was also a priest. In the historical narrative, he is not called a priest, though Psalm 99:6 might be interpreted to indicate his priestly office. There are a number of passages, however, that indicate he acted like a priest. For example, he offered sacrifices (1 Sm 7:9-10); as a young man he served in the sanctuary of Shiloh and wore an ephod (ch 2). Furthermore, one of the biblical genealogies implies priestly descent (1 Chr 6:23-30). Nevertheless, he is not normally identified as a priest and the introduction to his story refers to him as an Ephraimite, by descent from his father (1 Sm 1:1), not a Levite. If the priest is perceived as a permanent servant of the sanctuary, as was Eli, then it is clear that Samuel was not a priest. But the priestly role of Samuel may perhaps be related to the fact that his mother “lent” him to God (v 28) while he was still a boy.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Time of David and Solomon<\/h5>\n<p>Several radical changes took place during the reign of David and Solomon. These were a result, primarily, of the establishment of a permanent temple in Jerusalem and the installation of the ark of the covenant there. During the time of Saul, the first king of Israel, the social structure was essentially the same as it had been in the time of the judges. Saul, as king, was a military leader, but his relationship to religion and the priesthood was not clearly determined.<\/p>\n<p>David changed the situation in many important respects. After his capture of the city of Jerusalem, he made that place the political and religious capital of his nation. The religious centrality of Jerusalem was assured by moving the ark of the covenant there, together with the tabernacle. Jerusalem now became the permanent location of the ark, and therefore the permanent center of religion; at the same time, the various regional shrines, which had developed in the premonarchical period, were gradually eliminated.<\/p>\n<p>These changes had numerous implications for the priesthood and the Levites. During David’s reign, there were two principal priests, Abiathar and Zadok. Abiathar, a former priest of Nob, had joined David before his rise to power; he appears to have been a descendant of Eli, and through him of Ithamar, one of Aaron’s sons. Zadok’s background is less clear, though his lineage appears to go back to Aaron’s other son, Eleazar. These two priests are always named together in the texts describing David’s reign, and Zadok is always mentioned before Abiathar. Although neither is explicitly identified as high priest in the ancient texts, there is some evidence to suggest that Abiathar functioned as high priest (1 Kgs 2:35); in NT times, he is identified as such (Mk 2:26). Zadok, during David’s reign, may have been particularly responsible for the care of the ark of the covenant (2 Sm 15:24-25). These two priests had a significant position in David’s royal establishment; they may also have shared overall responsibility for the priests, whose lives were now centered on the Jerusalem temple.<\/p>\n<p>Much of David’s time was focused upon the preparations for building a permanent temple for God. In the preparation for the temple, and in its completion during the reign of King Solomon, the new activities of the Levites may be seen. (The construction of a permanent temple automatically removed their former responsibilities related to the care and transportation of the tabernacle.) Large numbers of Levites were employed as laborers in the actual building of the temple. Others found new tasks in the worship of God in the tabernacle during David’s reign and in the temple upon its completion. To the Levites, and especially to Heman, Asaph, and Ethan, was given primary responsibility for the music of worship; this involved not only singing but also the playing of a variety of instruments in the temple’s orchestra or band. The Levites had also a variety of other tasks; they worked as gatekeepers at the sanctuary, assisted the priests in the preparation of sacrifices, kept the sanctuary clean, and functioned as general administrative and legal officers (1 Chr 23:1-32). Other Levites functioned as bankers, with primary responsibility for the temple treasuries (26:20-28).<\/p>\n<p>Following David’s death, there was a dispute over the royal succession, from which Solomon emerged as the new king. During his reign, the temple was brought to its completion and the regular worship of the nation was conducted there. In the matter of succession, however, Abiathar had supported a losing candidate, and when Solomon was made king, he lost his important office in the royal court. During Solomon’s reign, the control of the priesthood passed into the hands of Zadok.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood during the Divided Monarchy<\/h5>\n<p>The great empire, which had been built by David and maintained by Solomon, collapsed after Solomon’s death. From the ruins, two new and relatively insignificant states emerged. The southern kingdom, Judah, retained Jerusalem as its capital and the temple as its center of worship. The northern kingdom, Israel, located its first capital at Shechem, from where it was later moved to Tirzah.<\/p>\n<p>In the southern state of Judah, the priests and Levites continued to function normally within the Jerusalem temple. The office of high priest continued to be passed on by descent within the family of Zadok, who had held office in Solomon’s reign. The continuity of office in this family was to be retained down into the time of the second temple, when the Zadokite succession was interrupted about 171 <span>BC<\/span>. Nevertheless, for all the continuity of religion in Jerusalem, all was not well with religion in Judah, neither during the reign of its first king, Rehoboam, nor during the reigns of his successors. During Rehoboam’s reign, there was a decline in religion and also in the priesthood, when popular forms of religion were introduced as a result of foreign influence (1 Kgs 14:22-24). The history of the southern kingdom was marked by periods of religious decline followed by reform, often as a result of the activities of the prophets. The role of the priesthood was all too rarely one of spiritual leadership, and the priests themselves were often the subject of criticism by the prophets (e.g., Jer 2:8, 26).<\/p>\n<p>The northern kingdom, whose first king was Jeroboam I, inevitably had to introduce some radical changes in religion. Jeroboam could not recognize the temple of Jerusalem, partly because it lay outside his state and partly because it was intimately associated with the royal line of David. Jeroboam established two principal shrines in his kingdom, both of which were to retain importance during the relatively short life of the northern kingdom (200 years). The first was at Bethel, in the southern part of his kingdom near the border of Judah (it was only about 12 miles, or 19.3 kilometers, north of Jerusalem). The second shrine, or sanctuary, was at Dan, in the far northern part of his kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Both these sanctuaries had ancient associations with the Hebrew traditions. Bethel is referred to as early as the time of Abram (Gn 12:8), and the sanctuary at Dan is known from the history of the judges (Jgs 18). There may indeed have been priests and Levites still residing in these two places, descendants of the former servants of the sanctuaries. But Jeroboam established a non-Levitical priesthood to serve in these sanctuaries and in various smaller shrines or “high places,” thereby cutting off the religious tradition of the northern state even more radically from that of Judah. The royal sanctuary at Bethel, so close to the Jerusalem temple, may have been set up in deliberate competition with the Judean sanctuary.<\/p>\n<p>The history of the priesthood in the northern kingdom is no more impressive than that of Judah. Many of the prophets, including Amos, Hosea, and Jeremiah, condemned the northern sanctuaries and their priests. Hosea was forceful in his condemnation: “As marauders lie in ambush for a man, so do bands of priests; they murder on the road to Shechem, committing shameful crimes” (Hos 6:9, <span>niv<\/span>). Those to whom the spiritual lives of the chosen people had been entrusted only rarely lived up to their responsibilities.<\/p>\n<h5>Priests and Levites during and after the Exile<\/h5>\n<p>The northern kingdom came to its end in 722 <span>BC<\/span>, defeated by the armies of Assyria, but religious life continued in Judah for a while longer. Eventually, the end of the southern state came about 586 <span>BC<\/span>; the defeat of the state by the Babylonians was accompanied by the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Lam 2:20). The Babylonian commander took Seraiah, the high priest, and Zephaniah, his assistant, to Riblah, where, along with other officials, they were executed (2 Kgs 25:18-21). Then a policy of exile was established by the Babylonians; the most important and influential people of Judah were deported to Babylon, while the less significant were allowed to remain, for they were unlikely to cause trouble. Of those exiled from Judah, many may have been priests (Jer 29:1), for they were men of influence. By way of contrast, it seems likely that a much smaller number of Levites was exiled, reflecting perhaps their inferior social position.<\/p>\n<p>In the city of Jerusalem there was little normal religious life during the years of the exile; the altar had been destroyed and was not restored until after the exile. No doubt some kind of activity continued, but it was an impoverished form of religion. Most of the priests were in exile in Babylon, but they could not function, for there was no temple or sanctuary. Ezekiel implies that God himself was the only “sanctuary” for the exiles (Ez 11:16). Not until the return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple could the normal functions of priests and Levites resume.<\/p>\n<p>When the Babylonian Empire was defeated, the new Persian conquerors instituted a policy whereby the Hebrew exiles could return to their homeland. Of those returning, 4,289 are designated as priests and members of priestly families, while only 341 were Levites (Ezr 2:36-42); the imbalance probably reflects the imbalance in the number of those exiled initially. Under Joshua (Jeshua), the priest, and Zerubbabel, work began on the restoration. The priests played a significant role in the first year of the return, in the restoration of the altar in Jerusalem, so that sacrifice and worship to God could resume. Once the altar had been restored, the work began on the temple itself in the second year of the return. In this work, both the priests and the Levites were involved, and the laying of new foundations for the temple began. When the foundation had been laid, both priests, in their vestments, and Levites, in their role as singers and musicians, participated in the ceremony of dedication (3:8-13). Again, when the temple had been rebuilt, both priests and Levites participated in the ceremony of dedication (6:16-18). The restoration, however, was concerned with more than buildings; it also involved a moral and religious component. Though priests and Levites helped in this task, they were also affected by it. Many, for example, had married foreign wives (9:1), and thus had to conform to Ezra’s reform laws.<\/p>\n<p>To some extent, the priests and Levites resumed their normal duties in the worship of the postexilic period. The priests were engaged in the conduct of the temple worship. The Levites assisted, as temple servants (Neh 11:3), as treasurers and collectors of tithes (10:37-39), and as instructors or teachers of the law of God (8:7-9). Nevertheless, the history of the priesthood after the exile is not free of blemish. Condemnation of the abuses of the priestly office was delivered by the prophet Malachi (Mal 1:6–2:9). Malachi catalogues a list of priestly evils reminiscent of the evil priests who lived during the time of the monarchy.<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest continued after the exile among the descendants of Zadok, being held first by Joshua (Hg 1:1). The different political circumstances, however, changed the nature of the high priestly office. Whereas in the days of the monarchy the high priest was subservient to the king, there was no king, in the proper sense, after the exile. From a political perspective, the Jews were members of a province or colony; for practical purposes, they were a community based upon a common religion. The high priest was no longer subject to the secular authority of a Jewish king, but his religious authority was considerable, and in some ways his functions were similar to those of a king in preexilic times.<\/p>\n<h5>The Priesthood in the Maccabean Period<\/h5>\n<p>During the second century <span>BC<\/span>, some changes took place in the priesthood, particularly with respect to the office of high priest, which marked the end of the OT era and set the background for the NT period. Judea, in the second century, was ruled by the Seleucid kings, who had inherited a portion of the massive Greek Empire established by Alexander the Great. The Judean province was controlled internally under the high priesthood, whose authority was received from the Seleucid kings.<\/p>\n<p>For the first three decades of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the high priesthood remained with the Zadokite line of descent. The high priests were members of the (Zadokite) Oniad family: first, Onias III (198–174 <span>BC<\/span>); then Jason, brother of Onias III (174–171 <span>BC<\/span>). It was in the period of Jason that there began a series of events that would terminate the Zadokite tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Onias III had opposed the Hellenization policy of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), which threatened to undermine the Jewish faith. Antiochus replaced Onias by Jason, who in effect purchased the high priesthood from the Seleucid king. In purchasing the priestly office, Jason had set a dangerous precedent; although he was of Zadokite descent, his act implied that the office could be bought and that descent was not vital. The opponents of Jason, the Tobiads, were able to remove him from office and have their own candidate, Menelaus (who was not a Zadokite), appointed in his place. This act resulted in a civil war between those supporting Jason and those supporting Menelaus, and the war in turn culminated in ruthless repressive measures by Antiochus Epiphanes; there were massacres in Jerusalem, and the temple was desecrated (167 <span>BC<\/span>). The desecration of the temple led to the Maccabean revolt, as a result of which the Jews regained their independence for a short time. Menelaus retained the office of high priest until 161 <span>BC<\/span> and was succeeded by Alcimus (161–159 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>There then followed a period during which there was no high priest for seven years. The political climate, however, was such that it became unlikely that the Zadokite line would ever regain the high priesthood, which had been established in the time of King Solomon. The Maccabean Jonathan gained control of Jerusalem, and in 152 <span>BC<\/span>, with the approval of the Seleucid king, he was formally invested with the high priest’s robes of office. He was succeeded as high priest and ruler by his brother Simon in 143 <span>BC<\/span>, who also held the office with the approval of the Seleucids (Demetrius II). But in the third year of his reign (140 <span>BC<\/span>), the high priesthood of Simon received public approval in a great religious assembly, and the family of Simon became “high priest forever” (1 Macc 14:41-47). That event marked the real termination of the Zadokite tradition and the foundation of the Hasmonean line.<\/p>\n<p>The establishment of the high priestly office outside the Zadokite line did not go without challenge. It is probable that a sect within Judaism, now known as the Essenes, was born in reaction to the high priesthood of Simon. The Essenes (better known for the Dead Sea Scrolls) appear to have been founded by a Zadokite priest who rejected the authenticity and authority of Simon. Thus, in a limited sense, the Zadokite priests continued to survive.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePriesthoodinNewTestamentTimes\">The Priesthood in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>In the early NT period, both priests and Levites continued to function within the Jewish religion. Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, was a priest belonging to the division of Abijah (Lk 1:5), and his wife was also of priestly descent. When Zechariah was visited by an angel, he was engaged at the time in priestly duties in the Jerusalem temple—various divisions of priests took responsibility for the temple services for a period of time and then returned to their homes (v 23), as another division took over. The distinction between priests and Levites is also maintained in the NT (Jn 1:19) and appears in Jesus’ parable concerning the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:31-32). Both priests and Levites were among the earliest converts to Christianity; Barnabas was a Levite from Cyprus (Acts 4:36), and several priests responded to the proclamation of the gospel (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>The office of high priest is frequently referred to in the NT. Several high priests are named, the plurality of current and former holders of the office reflecting the nature of the position as an essentially political appointment (as distinct from its oldest definition, that of an office passing from father to son on the death of the father). The two most significant high priests in the NT are those who held office during the lifetime of Jesus. Annas was high priest about <span>AD<\/span> 6 to 15, but even after he ceased to hold the office formally, he continued to exert considerable influence through his son-in-law, the high priest Caiaphas (c. <span>AD<\/span> 18–36). Both were significant figures in the trial of Jesus. At a later date, Ananias, son of Nedebaeus, was high priest (c. <span>AD<\/span> 47–58) and president of the Sanhedrin during the time in which Paul was brought to trial.<\/p>\n<p>The priesthood held considerable authority in NT times. Most internal and religious matters in the Roman province of Judea were within the authority of the Sanhedrin, which functioned as a kind of provincial government, though its powers were limited in certain matters by Rome. Its membership included the ruling and former high priests and a large number of Sadducees, many of whom belonged to influential priestly families. This priestly influence in the Sanhedrin was indicative of the important role of the temple in Jewish life during the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>In <span>AD<\/span> 70, following the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, a radical change came about in the significance of the priesthood in Judaism. The end of the temple removed in effect the purpose for the existence of the priesthood. Although the priesthood continued after a fashion until the Bar-Kochba rebellion in <span>AD<\/span> 135, its days were numbered after <span>AD<\/span> 70. Since the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, Judaism has developed without priests, and its course down to the present century has been charted by the rabbis, the spiritual descendants of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Priesthood.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","summary_en":"PRIESTS AND LEVITES Servants of God in the OT. There were three basic classes of religious personnel in ancient Israel: prophets, wise men, and priests and Levites. The classical prophets fulfilled a vocation but were not professionals; they were not paid for their task and functioned only in response to the particular call of God. The wise men were involved in government and education; some of their duties were secular, though they were also involved in moral education. The priests and Levit...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":33435,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55182,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","summary_en":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82808,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","summary_en":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110434,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","summary_en":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138060,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 2:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 2:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>2:27-28<\/strong> Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was <em>made to meet the needs of people<\/em><em>,<\/em> he is <em>Lord<\/em> . . . <em>over the Sabbath<\/em>. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.<\/p>","summary_ro":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","summary_en":"2:27-28 Since Jesus is the Lord of humanity (1 Cor 15:25-28; Eph 1:20-22; Phil 2:9-11) and since the Sabbath was made to meet the needs of people, he is Lord . . . over the Sabbath. As with Jesus’ authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7), this was a claim to divine authority.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":19610,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33438,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sabbath","title_en":"Sabbath","content_ro":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SABBATH<\/h3>\n<p>Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after six days and then “blessed” the seventh day and “declared it holy.” In the fourth commandment (Ex 20:8-11), God’s “blessing” and “setting aside” of the seventh day after Creation (the words used are the same as those in Genesis) form the basis of his demand that people should observe the seventh day as a day of Sabbath rest.<\/p>\n<p>The idea of God resting from his work is a startling one. It comes across even more vividly in Exodus 31:17, where the Lord tells Moses how he was refreshed by his day of rest. This picture of the Creator as a manual laborer is one the Bible often paints. No doubt it is presented in vividly human terms in Exodus to reinforce the fundamental Sabbath lesson that people must follow the pattern their Creator has set for them. One day’s rest in seven is a necessity for individuals, families, households, and even animals (Ex 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>The Sabbath’s setting in the biblical account of Creation implies that it is one of those OT standards that are meant for all people and not just for Israel. The inclusion of the Sabbath law in the Ten Commandments underlines this important truth. The Decalogue occupied a special place in OT law. Alone of all God’s instructions, it was spoken by his audible voice (Ex 20:1), written by his finger (31:18), and placed in the tabernacle ark at the heart of Israel’s worship (25:16). The NT, too, confirms the strong impression that the Decalogue as a whole embodies principles that are permanently valid for all people in all places at all times. Whether or not Sunday is recognized as the Christian Sabbath, one is obliged to accept the central principle of this biblical teaching as far as the Sabbath is concerned. God’s instructions require people to observe a regular weekly break from work.<\/p>\n<p>Significantly, the second main strand of the Bible’s Sabbath teaching—that of redemption—also features in a list of the Ten Commandments. The Sabbath law (already noted in Ex 20:8-11) reappears in Deuteronomy 5:12-15, but here a different reason is attached to its observance: “Remember that you were once slaves in Egypt and that the <span>Lord<\/span> your God brought you out with amazing power and mighty deeds. That is why the <span>Lord<\/span> your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day” (v 15, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The differences between these two accounts of the fourth commandment are important. The first (Ex 20) is addressed, <em>through<\/em> Israel, to all people as created beings. The second (Dt 5) is directed <em>to<\/em> Israel as God’s redeemed people. So the Sabbath is God’s signpost, pointing not only to his goodness toward all people as their Creator but also to his mercy toward his chosen people as their Redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>There is one other significant point in Deuteronomy’s version of the Sabbath commandment that must not be missed. The prohibition of all work on the Sabbath day is followed by an explanatory note—“On that day no one in your household may do any kind of work. This includes you, your sons and daughters, your male and female servants, your oxen and donkeys and other livestock, and any foreigners living among you. All your male and female servants must rest as you do” (Dt 5:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Practical concern for others is a feature of all the OT’s covenant teaching. So God’s loving concern for Israel in her Egyptian slavery must be matched by the Israelite family’s loving concern for those who served them. The Sabbath offered an ideal outlet for the practical expression of that concern. Jesus was especially keen to rescue this humanitarian side of Sabbath observance from the mass of callous regulations that threatened to suffocate it in his day (see, e.g., Mk 3:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The OT’s provision for a “sabbatical year” develops this humanitarian theme further (see Ex 23:10-12; Lv 25:1-7; Dt 15:1-11; also the regulations for the “year of jubilee” in Lv 25:8-55). Every seventh year the land was to lie fallow and be uncultivated (Lv 25:4). It needed a regular rest just as much as the people it sustained. The primary purpose of this law was benevolent: “But you, your male and female slaves, your hired servants, and any foreigners who live with you may eat the produce that grows naturally during the Sabbath year. And your livestock and the wild animals will also be allowed to eat of the land’s bounty” (vv 6-7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Deuteronomy 15:1-11 extends the same humanitarian principle into the world of commerce. The sabbatical year must see the canceling of all debts within God’s redeemed community. For the tight-fisted who might be tempted to refuse a loan if the sabbatical year was imminent, the law added a warning and a promise: “Do not be mean-spirited and refuse someone a loan because the year of release is close at hand. If you refuse to make the loan and the needy person cries out to the <span>Lord<\/span>, you will be considered guilty of sin. Give freely without begrudging it, and the <span>Lord<\/span> your God will bless you in everything you do” (Dt 15:9-10, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Observing the sabbatical year was obviously a great test of the people’s obedience to God and of their willingness to depend on him for their livelihood. Sometimes the temptation to turn a blind eye was too strong. But history testifies to Israel’s courage in observing the letter of this law on many occasions, despite threats of invasion and famine. Both Alexander the Great and the Romans excused Jews from paying taxes every seventh year in recognition of the depth of their religious convictions.<\/p>\n<p>Returning from the seventh year to the seventh day, the OT law codes go to considerable lengths to buttress the Sabbath ban on work by defining what may and may not be done by God’s people on the Sabbath day. The prohibitions were not meant to rule out activity of any kind. Their aim was to stop regular, everyday work, because if God had set aside the Sabbath (Ex 20:11), the most obvious way of profaning it was to treat it just like any other day. Rules were spelled out in specific terms that the farmer (34:21), the salesman (Jer 17:27), and even the housewife (Ex 35:2-3) would understand.<\/p>\n<p>The details may seem trivial, but obedience to the Sabbath law was seen as the main test of the people’s allegiance to the Lord. It was made quite clear that willful disobedience was a capital offense (Ex 35:2), and the fate of the person found gathering wood in defiance of Sabbath regulations showed that this was no idle threat (Nm 15:32-36).<\/p>\n<p>Hemmed in by so many rules and regulations (and with the death penalty overhanging all), the Sabbath easily could have become a day of fear—a day when the people were more afraid of committing an offense than worshiping the Lord and enjoying a weekly rest. But the Sabbath was intended to be a blessing, not a burden. Above everything else, it was a weekly sign that the Lord loved his people and wanted to draw them into an ever-closer relationship with himself. Those who valued that relationship enjoyed the Sabbath, calling it a delight (Is 58:13-14). Nowhere does the OT express its sheer joy in Sabbath worship more exuberantly than in Psalm 92, which has the title “A Song for the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets, were, however, far from blind to the darker side of human nature. They knew that a great deal of Sabbath observance was a sham. Many people treated the Sabbath day more as holiday than holy day, an opportunity for self-indulgence rather than delighting in the Lord (Is 58:13). Some greedy tradesmen found its restrictions an annoying irritant (Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>As God’s spokesman, the prophets did not shrink from exposing such neglect and abuse (Ez 22:26). Those who go through the motions of Sabbath worship with unrepentant hearts nauseate the Lord, Isaiah said (Is 1:10-15). As a symptom of rebellion against God, Jerusalem’s Sabbath breaking will bring destruction on the city, thunders Jeremiah (Jer 17:27). The Lord has been very forbearing with his people, warned Ezekiel, but prolonged neglect of his Sabbath makes judgment a certainty (Ez 20:12-24).<\/p>\n<p>When the ax of judgment fell (in the exile to Babylon, 586 <span>BC<\/span>), the surviving remnant of the nation took the lesson to heart. Sabbath keeping was one of the few distinctive marks faithful Jews could retain in a foreign land, so it assumed extra significance. At the prompting of prophets like Ezekiel, who set out rules for Sabbath worship in the rebuilt temple at Jerusalem (Ez 44:24; 45:17; 46:3), and under the leadership of men like Nehemiah, the returning exiles were more careful than their predecessors in observing the Sabbath day (Neh 10:31; 13:15-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the first century, some Jews in Palestine developed several rules for promoting the observance of the Sabbath. Two tractates of the Mishnah are devoted exclusively to these Sabbath rules and regulations. Their main purpose is to define work (one tractate does so under 39 headings) in an attempt to show every Israelite what is and is not permitted on the Sabbath. Unfortunately, this led to such hairsplitting complexities and evasions that ecclesiastical lawyers often differed among themselves in their interpretations, with the inevitable result that the main purpose of the Sabbath became lost beneath a mass of legalistic detail. The rabbis themselves were aware of how much they were adding to the straightforward teaching of the OT. As one of them put it, “The rules about the sabbath . . . are as mountains hanging by a hair, for Scripture is scanty and the rules many.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had many confrontations with the Jewish religious leaders over Sabbath observances. From their perspective, Jesus was a Sabbath breaker and therefore a lawbreaker. Jesus, however, never saw himself as a Sabbath breaker. He went to synagogue regularly on the Sabbath day (Lk 4:16). He read the lesson, preached, and taught (Mk 1:21; Lk 13:10). He clearly accepted the principle that the Sabbath was an appropriate day for worship.<\/p>\n<p>His point of collision with the Pharisees was the point at which their tradition departed from biblical teaching. He made this clear when he defended his disciples by appealing to Scripture, after they had been accused of breaking Sabbath tradition by walking through grainfields and breaking off heads of wheat (which fell into the category of “harvesting,” according to the Pharisees; Mk 2:23-26). He followed this up with a remark that took his hearers straight back to God’s Creation purpose for the Sabbath: “The Sabbath was made to benefit people, and not people to benefit the Sabbath” (Mk 2:27, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Rabbinic tradition had exalted the institution above the people it was meant to serve. By making it an end in itself, the Pharisees had effectively robbed the Sabbath of one of its main purposes. Jesus’ words must have sounded uncomfortably familiar in his opponents’ ears. A famous rabbi had once said, “The Sabbath is given over to you, but you are not given over to the Sabbath.”<\/p>\n<p>More than anything else, Jesus’ Sabbath healings put him on a collision course with rabbinic restrictions. The OT does not forbid cures on the Sabbath day, but the rabbis labeled all healing as work, which must always be avoided on the Sabbath unless life was at risk. Jesus fearlessly exposed the callousness and absurd inconsistencies to which this attitude led. How, he asked, could it be right to circumcise a baby or lead an animal to water on the Sabbath day (which tradition allowed) but wrong to heal a chronically handicapped woman and a crippled man, even if their lives were not in immediate danger (Lk 13:10-17; Jn 7:21-24)? The Sabbath, he taught, was a particularly appropriate day for acts of mercy (Mk 3:4-5).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus, the man from heaven, claimed that he was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28; cf. Mt 12:5-8). Just as God kept working, despite his Creation rest, to sustain the world in his mercy, so Jesus would continue to teach and to heal on the Sabbath day (Jn 5:2-17). But one day his redemptive work would be complete, and then the Sabbath’s purpose as a sign of redemption would be accomplished.<\/p>\n<p>Living on the other side of Jesus’ death and resurrection, Paul was quick to grasp the significance of both for Sabbath observance. He did not go so far as to ban all observance of the Jewish Sabbath. Indeed, he attended many Sabbath synagogue services himself in his evangelistic travels (see, e.g., Acts 13:14-16). Jewish Christians who insisted on keeping up their Sabbath practices were free to do so, provided they respected the opinions of those who differed (Rom 14:5-6, 13). But any suggestion that observing the Jewish calendar was necessary for salvation must be resisted (Gal 4:8-11). For Paul considered the Sabbath to be a shadow, while Christ himself is the reality of that shadow (Col 2:17).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, it is the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews who explains how the twin biblical “sabbath themes” of creation and redemption find their joint fulfillment in Christ. He did so by linking together the ideas of God’s rest after Creation and his redemptive act in bringing Israel to her “rest” in Canaan, and by showing how both relate to the present and future rest that Christians can and do enjoy in Jesus (Heb 4:1-11).<\/p>\n<p>God intends all his people to share his rest—that is, his promise (Heb 4:1). He showed this intention clearly when he brought Israel to the Promised Land, but that did not mark the complete fulfillment of his promise. The full, complete rest still waiting for the people of God is in heaven. Christ has already entered there. He is resting from his work, just as God did after the Creation. And because of his redeeming work, he invites all those who believe in him to share that same “sabbath rest” now (v 9).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lord’s Day, The; Sabbath Day’s Journey; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","summary_en":"SABBATH Derivation of a Hebrew word that means “cease” or “desist.” The Sabbath was a day (from Friday evening until Saturday evening in Jesus’ time) when all ordinary work stopped. The Scriptures relate that God gave his people the Sabbath as an opportunity to serve him and as a reminder of two great truths in the Bible—Creation and redemption. In the Old Testament The relationship between Creation and the Sabbath is first expressed in Genesis 2:2-3. God “ceased” his work in Creation after s...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35851,"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}]},"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"}}