Marcu 7
1 Fariseii şi cîţiva cărturari, veniţi din Ierusalim, s-au adunat la Isus.
2 Ei au văzut pe unii din ucenicii Lui prânzând cu mânile necurate, adică nespălate. -
3 Fariseii, însă, şi toţi Iudeii nu mănâncă fără să-şi spele cu mare băgare de seamă mânile, după datina bătrânilor.
4 Şi când se întorc din piaţă, nu mănâncă decât dupăce s-au scăldat. Sânt multe alte obiceiuri pe cari au apucat ei să le ţină, precum: spălarea paharelor, a ulcioarelor, a căldărilor şi a paturilor. -
5 Şi Fariseii şi cărturarii L-au întrebat: ,,Pentruce nu se ţin ucenicii Tăi de datina bătrânilor, ci prânzesc cu mânile nespălate?``
6 Isus le-a răspuns: ,,Făţarnicilor, bine a proorocit Isaia despre voi, după cum este scris: ,Norodul acesta Mă cinsteşte cu buzele, dar inima lui este departe de Mine.
7 Degeaba Mă cinstesc ei, dând învăţături cari nu sânt decât nişte porunci omeneşti.`
8 Voi lăsaţi porunca lui Dumnezeu, şi ţineţi datina aşezată de oameni, precum: spălarea ulcioarelor şi a paharelor, şi faceţi multe alte lucruri de acestea.``
9 El le-a mai zis: ,,Aţi desfiinţat frumos porunca lui Dumnezeu, ca să ţineţi datina voastră.
10 Căci Moise a zis: ,,Să cinsteşti pe tatăl tău şi pe mama ta;`` şi: ,,Cine va grăi de rău pe tatăl său sau pe mama sa, să fie pedepsit cu moartea.``
11 Voi, dimpotrivă, ziceţi: ,,Dacă un om va spune tatălui său sau mamei sale: ,Ori cu ce te-aş putea ajuta, este ,Corban`, adică dat lui Dumnezeu, face bine;
12 şi nu-l mai lăsaţi să facă nimic pentru tatăl sau pentru mama sa.
13 Şi aşa, aţi desfiinţat Cuvântul lui Dumnezeu, prin datina voastră. Şi faceţi multe alte lucruri de felul acesta!``
14 În urmă, a chemat din nou noroadele la Sine, şi le-a zis: ,,Ascultaţi-Mă toţi şi înţelegeţi.
15 Afară din om nu este nimic care, intrând în el, să-l poată spurca; dar ce iese din om, aceea-l spurcă.
16 Dacă are cineva urechi de auzit, să audă.``
17 Dupăce a intrat în casă, pe când era departe de norod, ucenicii Lui L-au întrebat despre pilda aceasta.
18 El le-a zis: ,,Şi voi sânteţi aşa de nepricepuţi? Nu înţelegeţi că nimic din ce intră în om de afară, nu-l poate spurca?
19 Fiindcă nu intră în inima lui, ci în pântece, şi apoi este dat afară în hazna?`` A zis astfel, făcând toate bucatele curate.
20 El le-a mai zis: ,,Ce iese din om, aceea spurcă pe om.
21 Căci dinlăuntru, din inima oamenilor, ies gândurile rele, preacurviile, curviile, uciderile,
22 furtişagurile, lăcomiile, vicleşugurile, înşelăciunile, faptele de ruşine, ochiul rău, hula, trufia, nebunia.
23 Toate aceste lucruri rele ies dinlăuntru, şi spurcă pe om.``
24 Isus a plecat de acolo, şi S-a dus în ţinutul Tirului şi al Sidonului. A intrat într-o casă, dorind să nu ştie nimeni că este acolo; dar n-a putut să rămână ascuns.
25 Căci îndată, o femeie, a cărei fetiţă era stăpânită de un duh necurat, a auzit vorbindu-se despre El, şi a venit de s-a aruncat la picioarele Lui.
26 Femeia aceasta era o grecoaică, de obârşie Siro-feniciană. Ea îl ruga să scoată pe dracul din fiica ei.
27 Isus i-a zis: ,,Lasă să se sature mai întâi copiii; căci nu este bine să iei pânea copiilor, şi s-o arunci la căţei.``
28 ,,Da, Doamne``, I-a răspuns ea; ,,dar şi căţeii de supt masă mănâncă din fărămiturile copiilor.``
29 Atunci Isus i-a zis: ,,Pentru vorba aceasta, du-te; a ieşit dracul din fiică-tă.``
30 Şi când a intrat femeia în casa ei, a găsit pe copilă culcată în pat; şi ieşise dracul din ea.
31 Isus a părăsit ţinutul Tirului, şi a venit iarăş prin Sidon la marea Galileii, trecând prin ţinutul Decapole.
32 I-au adus un surd, care vorbea cu anevoie, şi L-au rugat să-Şi pună mânile peste el.
33 El l-a luat la o parte din norod, i-a pus degetele în urechi, şi i-a atins limba cu scuipatul Lui.
34 Apoi, Şi-a ridicat ochii spre cer, a suspinat, şi a zis: ,,Efata``, adică: ,,Deschide-te!``
35 Îndată, i s-au deschis urechile, i s-a deslegat limba, şi a vorbit foarte desluşit.
36 Isus le-a poruncit să nu spună nimănui; dar cu cât le poruncea mai mult, cu atât Îl vesteau mai mult.
37 Ei erau uimiţi peste măsură de mult, şi ziceau: ,,Toate le face de minune; chiar şi pe surzi îi face să audă, şi pe muţi să vorbească.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":42052,"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":69678,"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":97304,"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":124930,"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":7546,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corban*","title_en":"Corban*","content_ro":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","summary_en":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16535,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Holiness","title_en":"Holiness","content_ro":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","summary_en":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17064,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hypocrisy","title_en":"Hypocrisy","content_ro":"<h3>HYPOCRISY<\/h3>\n<p>The act of pretending to be what one is not, especially the false appearance of being religious or virtuous. Our modern understanding of the word “hypocrisy” is determined by its use in the NT, especially by Jesus. In both the NT and subsequent understandings the term most often meant deceit, misrepresenting the truth, or claiming virtues or qualities one does not possess.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to its consistently negative meaning in the Bible, hypocrisy as first used by the Greeks was a neutral word. In its verb form it meant “to explain, to interpret, or to expound.” Although the noun “hypocrisy” could mean “answer,” the other noun form, “hypocrite,” almost always meant “actor” and probably came from the verb meaning “to expound.”<\/p>\n<p>Originally, a hypocrite could be a speaker or actor who interpreted the words of a poet or the music of a composer. The actor, or hypocrite, tried to make intelligible for his audience what the poet or composer had written. On a larger scale the hypocrite could be one actor among others in a drama performed on a stage. A good hypocrite faithfully interpreted his assigned role, while an undesirable hypocrite interpreted his role poorly. Because of the word’s essential neutrality, accompanying words were necessary to set its direction.<\/p>\n<p>In Hellenistic times (c. 325–125 <span>BC<\/span>), the world was commonly viewed as a stage and all human conduct as the art of acting. One’s role and script were written for him by his familial, cultural, and religious environment and could be performed either successfully or poorly. When used in this sense, hypocrisy did not carry the idea of pretense or sham. Nevertheless, there are instances where the term “hypocrite” was used to describe a person who performed life’s role deceptively. The image presented to the public was only a mask behind which the true and different self lay hidden.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels often use the terms “hypocrisy” (Mt 23:28; Mk 12:15b; Lk 12:1) and “hypocrite” (Mt 7:5; 24:51; Lk 6:42; 13:15) to record the conflict between Jesus and his opponents. With respect to the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus detected a blatant contrast between their outward forms of righteousness and their failure to embrace the more substantive aspects of righteousness: mercy, justice, humility, forgiveness, and love toward the unlovely (Lk 11:38, 42). They hid their failure in this matter behind pious pretense (Mk 7:1-13). Inwardly they were full of greed and wickedness (Lk 11:39). Hypocrisy defines the one who presents an outward appearance of righteousness but who is inwardly marked by wickedness (Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemned hypocrisy because it distorts God’s righteous command. Rather than pursue an authentic inward holiness, the hypocrites distorted righteousness into a rigid mold whose chief usefulness was exhibition before people (Mt 23:2-7). Their idea of righteousness revealed a warped conception of God and a perverse understanding of how he reconciles sinners to himself (Lk 16:15). The hypocrites, who claimed to interpret God to humans, actually misrepresented him. Consequently, their falsification led sinners away from God rather than toward reconciliation with him (Lk 11:52). Hypocrites not only keep others from entering the kingdom of God, they refrain from going in themselves (Mt 23:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HYPOCRISY<\/h3>\n<p>The act of pretending to be what one is not, especially the false appearance of being religious or virtuous. Our modern understanding of the word “hypocrisy” is determined by its use in the NT, especially by Jesus. In both the NT and subsequent understandings the term most often meant deceit, misrepresenting the truth, or claiming virtues or qualities one does not possess.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to its consistently negative meaning in the Bible, hypocrisy as first used by the Greeks was a neutral word. In its verb form it meant “to explain, to interpret, or to expound.” Although the noun “hypocrisy” could mean “answer,” the other noun form, “hypocrite,” almost always meant “actor” and probably came from the verb meaning “to expound.”<\/p>\n<p>Originally, a hypocrite could be a speaker or actor who interpreted the words of a poet or the music of a composer. The actor, or hypocrite, tried to make intelligible for his audience what the poet or composer had written. On a larger scale the hypocrite could be one actor among others in a drama performed on a stage. A good hypocrite faithfully interpreted his assigned role, while an undesirable hypocrite interpreted his role poorly. Because of the word’s essential neutrality, accompanying words were necessary to set its direction.<\/p>\n<p>In Hellenistic times (c. 325–125 <span>BC<\/span>), the world was commonly viewed as a stage and all human conduct as the art of acting. One’s role and script were written for him by his familial, cultural, and religious environment and could be performed either successfully or poorly. When used in this sense, hypocrisy did not carry the idea of pretense or sham. Nevertheless, there are instances where the term “hypocrite” was used to describe a person who performed life’s role deceptively. The image presented to the public was only a mask behind which the true and different self lay hidden.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels often use the terms “hypocrisy” (Mt 23:28; Mk 12:15b; Lk 12:1) and “hypocrite” (Mt 7:5; 24:51; Lk 6:42; 13:15) to record the conflict between Jesus and his opponents. With respect to the Pharisees and Sadducees, Jesus detected a blatant contrast between their outward forms of righteousness and their failure to embrace the more substantive aspects of righteousness: mercy, justice, humility, forgiveness, and love toward the unlovely (Lk 11:38, 42). They hid their failure in this matter behind pious pretense (Mk 7:1-13). Inwardly they were full of greed and wickedness (Lk 11:39). Hypocrisy defines the one who presents an outward appearance of righteousness but who is inwardly marked by wickedness (Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus condemned hypocrisy because it distorts God’s righteous command. Rather than pursue an authentic inward holiness, the hypocrites distorted righteousness into a rigid mold whose chief usefulness was exhibition before people (Mt 23:2-7). Their idea of righteousness revealed a warped conception of God and a perverse understanding of how he reconciles sinners to himself (Lk 16:15). The hypocrites, who claimed to interpret God to humans, actually misrepresented him. Consequently, their falsification led sinners away from God rather than toward reconciliation with him (Lk 11:52). Hypocrites not only keep others from entering the kingdom of God, they refrain from going in themselves (Mt 23:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HYPOCRISY The act of pretending to be what one is not, especially the false appearance of being religious or virtuous. Our modern understanding of the word “hypocrisy” is determined by its use in the NT, especially by Jesus. In both the NT and subsequent understandings the term most often meant deceit, misrepresenting the truth, or claiming virtues or qualities one does not possess. In contrast to its consistently negative meaning in the Bible, hypocrisy as first used by the Greeks was a neut...","summary_en":"HYPOCRISY The act of pretending to be what one is not, especially the false appearance of being religious or virtuous. Our modern understanding of the word “hypocrisy” is determined by its use in the NT, especially by Jesus. In both the NT and subsequent understandings the term most often meant deceit, misrepresenting the truth, or claiming virtues or qualities one does not possess. In contrast to its consistently negative meaning in the Bible, hypocrisy as first used by the Greeks was a neut...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24376,"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":30133,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pharisees","title_en":"Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","summary_en":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55291,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","summary_en":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55292,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","summary_en":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82917,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","summary_en":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82918,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","summary_en":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110543,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","summary_en":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110544,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","summary_en":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138169,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1-23<\/strong> This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","summary_en":"7:1-23 This account has no direct connection with what precedes it. It assumes only a context such as “Once in the ministry of Jesus.” After setting the scene (7:1-4), Mark introduces the Pharisees’ question (7:5), followed by Jesus’ response (7:6-23). The first part of Jesus’ response (7:6-13) centers around two Old Testament passages and a twofold attack on the Pharisees’ traditions (7:6-8, 9-13). In the second part (7:14-23), Jesus teaches about what does and does not truly defile.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138170,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:1<\/strong> Readers already know that the <em>Pharisees and teachers of religious law<\/em> were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","summary_en":"7:1 Readers already know that the Pharisees and teachers of religious law were hostile to Jesus (see 2:16, 24; 3:6, 22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67440,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Legalism","title_en":"Legalism","content_ro":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","summary_en":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95066,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Legalism","title_en":"Legalism","content_ro":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","summary_en":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122692,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Legalism","title_en":"Legalism","content_ro":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","summary_en":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150318,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Legalism","title_en":"Legalism","content_ro":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Legalism<\/h3>\n<p>The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find themselves. Their motivation was often a positive desire not to transgress any of God’s laws. As Jesus often pointed out, however, the rules developed by religious leaders sometimes became obstacles to obeying God’s instructions (Mark 7:1-15). Furthermore, many Jews thought that following the law would automatically endear them to God.<\/p>\n<p>Paul frequently confronted this kind of problematic legalism in the early churches. For example, in Colosse, false teachers, influenced by Jewish beliefs, were insisting that Christians follow certain rules as a way of expressing their faith (Colossians 2:16-23). Paul criticized this in light of faith in Christ. As the culmination of all God’s plans and purposes, Christ is the center of all true piety.<\/p>\n<p>This does not mean that rules for conduct are inherently bad. Some rules, such as the prohibition on lying (Col 3:9), clearly manifest an aspect of Christ’s character. Paul also had no problem with individual Christians imposing rules on themselves that they think are conducive to their own growth in Christ (cp. Rom 14:5; 1 Cor 8). But they must not require others to obey these self-imposed rules.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 23:13-33; Mark 7:1-15; Gal 2:14-21; Col 2:16-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","summary_en":"Legalism The law was of critical importance for the Jewish people, and their understanding of religion was largely centered on the observance of rules and rituals. This was natural to them because God had given his law to the Jewish people as a mark of his favor upon them and as a way for them to ratify the covenant agreement he had made with them. However, many Jews added to the laws that God had given his people, trying to develop rules for virtually every situation in which they might find...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":34131,"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":55293,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","summary_en":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82919,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","summary_en":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110545,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","summary_en":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138171,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:2","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:2-4<\/strong> Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The <em>ancient traditions<\/em> (literally <em>the traditions of the elders<\/em>) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around <span>AD<\/span> 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","summary_en":"7:2-4 Mark explains the Pharisaic practices of ritual cleansing for his non-Jewish (Gentile) readers. The ancient traditions (literally the traditions of the elders) were as yet unwritten accounts that the Pharisees believed had been given to Moses on Mount Sinai along with the written law. They were written down around AD 200 in the Mishnah, one of the key sources for understanding ancient Judaism.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":19774,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jew","title_en":"Jew","content_ro":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEW<\/h3>\n<p>Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century <span>BC<\/span>; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual citizen had the right to freedom from slavery uses the term “Jew.” In Jeremiah 52:28 it is poignantly used in giving the number of deported citizens.<\/p>\n<p>Once the people were in exile, the term’s national meaning was expanded with a religious one. The Jews were different from surrounding peoples in that they preserved a living religious tradition of one true God. A Jewish-Gentile polarization developed. Thus in Daniel 3:8-12 certain Jews are accused of deviating from otherwise acceptable Babylonian religious practices. The book of Esther is concerned with the problem of Jewish identity and survival in a hostile alien environment. Esther 8:17 speaks of Gentiles declaring themselves Jews in the religious sense of becoming proselytes.<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the strongly religious meaning of “Jew” is expressed in the prophecy of Zechariah 8:23 that the Jew would be courted by Gentiles because God was with him. In Ezra 4:12 the term “Jews” is the national designation of the returned exiles, as it is in the book of Nehemiah (e.g., Neh 1:2; 4:2). In Nehemiah 13:24 there is a consciousness of the social exclusiveness of the Jews: on religious grounds, marriage to foreigners is deplored.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT “Jew” continues to have the same national and\/or religious meaning. Culturally, Jews have religious and other customs that NT documents addressed to Gentiles find it necessary to explain (Mk 7:3; Jn 5:1; 19:40). Jews are contrasted with Gentiles (Acts 11:19), Samaritans (Jn 4:9, 22), and proselytes (Acts 2:10). Jewish Christians can be called “Jews” (Gal 2:13), but there is an increasing stress on the religious distinctions between Jew and Christian. In Romans 2:17-29 Paul gives an interesting theological analysis of the term “Jew.” He is at pains to emphasize that the true meaning of the word lies not in outward religious profession but in an inward attitude to God. Paul was doubtless thinking of the inadequacy of his own life as a Jew before he was converted to the Christian faith (cf. Phil 3:3-6). His mention of “praise” in Romans 2:29 is the climax of the passage. It is a forceful play on words: in Hebrew, Judah means praise (Gn 29:35; cf. 49:8).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul is here moving in the direction of regarding Christianity as the true heir of the faith of the OT. Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 express similar sentiments: to be truly a Jew is much more than a matter of birth and synagogue observance. Underlying these passages in both Revelation and Romans is obviously the issue of the messianic claims of Jesus (cf. Rom 9:3-5; 10:1-4). The NT bears sad testimony to the opposition of Jews to the Christian message. The gospel proved a cause of offense to the Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Paul himself, despite his claim of impeccable Jewish credentials (Acts 26:4-7), found himself the object of bitter Jewish attacks (21:11; 23:12, 27). Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 describe the Jews’ opposition as satanic: they were carrying out the work of God’s adversary, Satan.<\/p>\n<p>These negative overtones are especially attached to the use of the word “Jew” in John’s Gospel. It is found some 70 times, versus about five or six instances in each of the synoptic Gospels. Some passages, such as those already cited, have no associations of hostility. But in most cases the fourth Gospel uses “Jews” in the sense of the religious authorities, especially those in Jerusalem, who were hostile to Jesus (see, e.g., Jn 5:18; 9:18; 11:8; 18:36). It is noteworthy that in 9:22 the parents of the blind man, clearly Jews themselves, are said, literally, to fear the investigating Jews. In 18:14 “Jews” stands for the chief priests and Pharisees of 18:3. It must be emphasized that the author, who was obviously a Jew himself, was not expressing an anti-Semitic viewpoint as such. He condemned not race or people but those who opposed Jesus. He gladly acknowledged that some Jews put their faith in Jesus (8:31; 11:45: 12:11). Nathanael is featured as a type of the Christian Jew, a true Israelite “in whom is no guile” (1:47; cf. v 31; see Gn 27:35; 32:28).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Diaspora of the Jews; Israel, History of; Judaism; Judaizers; Pharisees; Postexilic Period.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","summary_en":"JEW Judean, belonging to Judah. The short form of the English word was developed from the French. The underlying Hebrew word is used first in 2 Kings 16:6 as a national term, meaning citizens of Judah. It came into general use in the period of Jeremiah just before the exile (late sixth century BC; see Jer 32:12). It reflects a growing sense of national identity among foreign nations in an international world. In Jeremiah 34:9, a statement concerning the national principle that an individual c...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24323,"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":37560,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Torah*","title_en":"Torah*","content_ro":"<h3>TORAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Word translated “law” in the OT, derived from the Hebrew verbal root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to throw” or “to shoot.” The idea behind the word is to inform, instruct, direct, or guide. In Jewish tradition it is most frequently used to designate the text of the first five books of the Bible, also called the Pentateuch. Quite properly, however, the word has a wider meaning, acknowledged by OT usage, which embraces all directives that come from God. This is true in the NT as well where <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span>—represented by the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span>—may refer to either the Mosaic legislation (Rom 7:14) or a broad behavioral principle (9:31).<\/p>\n<p>For the Jew, the law includes what has been called the “oral Torah,” that is, the sayings of the rabbis and venerated fathers of Judaism throughout the centuries. Such verbal tradition, while not part of the canonical books of the OT, seeks to interpret the texts of the Law to enable people to comply with the will of God. This method has often resulted in lessening the demands in the Law through reinterpreting them. Without temple worship, priesthood, or sacrifice—all prescribed by the Torah—such compromise with the Torah’s demands became inevitable. These oral traditions were firmly entrenched at the time of Christ’s advent and were held by many Jews to have been implicit in the Torah given to Moses (cf. Mk 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees believed that the failure of the Jews to obey the Torah resulted in the great Babylonian captivity in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Furthermore, it is commonly taught that until the Torah is rigorously subscribed to by all Jews, the Messiah will not appear upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>For the Sadducees, the Torah represented the only part of the OT that they accepted as authoritative. Their tendency, however, was to deemphasize the supernatural elements in the Pentateuch. Contrary to their viewpoint on resurrection, Jesus Christ quoted from the Torah to affirm eternal life (cf. Mt 22:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>From the most ancient days, the reading of the Torah in the synagogue has been accompanied by great ceremony. To be called upon to read from these sacred scrolls is a high honor. It is written in Hebrew by a highly skilled craftsman known as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sofer<\/span><em>,<\/em> or scribe. The Torah is found in the form of a roll, the scroll for which is of parchment taken from the skin of ceremonially clean animals. The rods around which the Torah is rolled are usually of wood, silver, or ivory. Ornately designed ends of the rods are magnificent aesthetic creations frequently wrought in precious metals and stones. A person reading from the scroll uses a delicate pointer, called a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yad<\/span><em>,<\/em> to follow the words. Use of the pointer safeguards the scroll, which would soon be damaged by the constant running of fingers over the fine manuscript. Moreover, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yad<\/span> minimizes the possibility for error in oral recitation by preventing the reader from losing his place and possibly skipping some words of God’s sacred revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Among Jewish orthodoxy it is maintained that inasmuch as the Torah was the gift of God to Israel, the gentile nations are not required to submit to its regulations. However, Maimonides, the medieval Jewish scholar, taught that Gentiles would have a share in the world to come by obeying the covenant God made with Noah. Seven commands are commonly linked to that agreement, namely, the abstaining from idolatry, incest, shedding of blood, profaning the name of God, injustice, robbery, and eating the flesh of live animals.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant maintains that the Torah, while a necessary stage in the outworking of redemption, was never given to enable individuals to receive salvation on the basis of obeying the law. Although Leviticus 18:5 appears to hold out the possibility of working for righteousness, flawless obedience to God’s will is beyond the reach of fallen humanity. The OT clearly bore witness to the role of grace in redemption by revealing the great patriarch Abraham to be justified by faith (Gn 15). Since that covenant preceded the Torah by four centuries, it presents an unalterable witness to the way in which God receives sinful people. A primary function of the law is to reveal people’s fallen spiritual condition and thereby serve as a tutor leading them to Christ (Gal 3:24). As a sinner is exposed to the demands of the law, he or she is convicted of great sinfulness (Rom 7:7) and consequently seeks the grace of God in Christ. It is clear that Jesus Christ held the Torah in high regard, the purpose of his ministry being the fulfillment of its contents. That great work of satisfying the demands of the law is reckoned in the lives of all who entrust themselves to Christ; he is the end of the law so that everyone who has faith in him may be justified (Rom 10:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Talmud.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TORAH*<\/h3>\n<p>Word translated “law” in the OT, derived from the Hebrew verbal root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yarah<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to throw” or “to shoot.” The idea behind the word is to inform, instruct, direct, or guide. In Jewish tradition it is most frequently used to designate the text of the first five books of the Bible, also called the Pentateuch. Quite properly, however, the word has a wider meaning, acknowledged by OT usage, which embraces all directives that come from God. This is true in the NT as well where <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">torah<\/span>—represented by the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">nomos<\/span>—may refer to either the Mosaic legislation (Rom 7:14) or a broad behavioral principle (9:31).<\/p>\n<p>For the Jew, the law includes what has been called the “oral Torah,” that is, the sayings of the rabbis and venerated fathers of Judaism throughout the centuries. Such verbal tradition, while not part of the canonical books of the OT, seeks to interpret the texts of the Law to enable people to comply with the will of God. This method has often resulted in lessening the demands in the Law through reinterpreting them. Without temple worship, priesthood, or sacrifice—all prescribed by the Torah—such compromise with the Torah’s demands became inevitable. These oral traditions were firmly entrenched at the time of Christ’s advent and were held by many Jews to have been implicit in the Torah given to Moses (cf. Mk 7:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees believed that the failure of the Jews to obey the Torah resulted in the great Babylonian captivity in the seventh century <span>BC<\/span>. Furthermore, it is commonly taught that until the Torah is rigorously subscribed to by all Jews, the Messiah will not appear upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>For the Sadducees, the Torah represented the only part of the OT that they accepted as authoritative. Their tendency, however, was to deemphasize the supernatural elements in the Pentateuch. Contrary to their viewpoint on resurrection, Jesus Christ quoted from the Torah to affirm eternal life (cf. Mt 22:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>From the most ancient days, the reading of the Torah in the synagogue has been accompanied by great ceremony. To be called upon to read from these sacred scrolls is a high honor. It is written in Hebrew by a highly skilled craftsman known as a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">sofer<\/span><em>,<\/em> or scribe. The Torah is found in the form of a roll, the scroll for which is of parchment taken from the skin of ceremonially clean animals. The rods around which the Torah is rolled are usually of wood, silver, or ivory. Ornately designed ends of the rods are magnificent aesthetic creations frequently wrought in precious metals and stones. A person reading from the scroll uses a delicate pointer, called a <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yad<\/span><em>,<\/em> to follow the words. Use of the pointer safeguards the scroll, which would soon be damaged by the constant running of fingers over the fine manuscript. Moreover, the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">yad<\/span> minimizes the possibility for error in oral recitation by preventing the reader from losing his place and possibly skipping some words of God’s sacred revelation.<\/p>\n<p>Among Jewish orthodoxy it is maintained that inasmuch as the Torah was the gift of God to Israel, the gentile nations are not required to submit to its regulations. However, Maimonides, the medieval Jewish scholar, taught that Gentiles would have a share in the world to come by obeying the covenant God made with Noah. Seven commands are commonly linked to that agreement, namely, the abstaining from idolatry, incest, shedding of blood, profaning the name of God, injustice, robbery, and eating the flesh of live animals.<\/p>\n<p>The new covenant maintains that the Torah, while a necessary stage in the outworking of redemption, was never given to enable individuals to receive salvation on the basis of obeying the law. Although Leviticus 18:5 appears to hold out the possibility of working for righteousness, flawless obedience to God’s will is beyond the reach of fallen humanity. The OT clearly bore witness to the role of grace in redemption by revealing the great patriarch Abraham to be justified by faith (Gn 15). Since that covenant preceded the Torah by four centuries, it presents an unalterable witness to the way in which God receives sinful people. A primary function of the law is to reveal people’s fallen spiritual condition and thereby serve as a tutor leading them to Christ (Gal 3:24). As a sinner is exposed to the demands of the law, he or she is convicted of great sinfulness (Rom 7:7) and consequently seeks the grace of God in Christ. It is clear that Jesus Christ held the Torah in high regard, the purpose of his ministry being the fulfillment of its contents. That great work of satisfying the demands of the law is reckoned in the lives of all who entrust themselves to Christ; he is the end of the law so that everyone who has faith in him may be justified (Rom 10:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Talmud.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TORAH* Word translated “law” in the OT, derived from the Hebrew verbal root yarah, which means “to throw” or “to shoot.” The idea behind the word is to inform, instruct, direct, or guide. In Jewish tradition it is most frequently used to designate the text of the first five books of the Bible, also called the Pentateuch. Quite properly, however, the word has a wider meaning, acknowledged by OT usage, which embraces all directives that come from God. This is true in the NT as well where torah—...","summary_en":"TORAH* Word translated “law” in the OT, derived from the Hebrew verbal root yarah, which means “to throw” or “to shoot.” The idea behind the word is to inform, instruct, direct, or guide. In Jewish tradition it is most frequently used to designate the text of the first five books of the Bible, also called the Pentateuch. Quite properly, however, the word has a wider meaning, acknowledged by OT usage, which embraces all directives that come from God. This is true in the NT as well where torah—...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":24427,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marketplace Market","title_en":"Marketplace Market","content_ro":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","summary_en":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38323,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Weights and Measures","title_en":"Weights and Measures","content_ro":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WeightMeasures\">Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>The terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\n<p>There was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>Stone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\n<p>According to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\n<p>In the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\n<p>The shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\n<p>The shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\n<p>The only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\n<p>Seven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\n<p>Equal to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\n<p>The NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Measurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>The length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\n<p>The distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\n<p>The width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>For the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\n<p>The distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\n<p>The length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\n<p>The only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheOldTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Amounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\n<p>The most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\n<p>Unit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\n<p>This is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\n<p>A fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\n<p>The omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheNewTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\n<p>Occurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\n<p>This is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\n<p>This is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Three basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>The base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\n<p>One-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\n<p>A measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (<span>nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (<span>kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WEIGHTS AND MEASURES<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While this was a convenient system, it also suffered from a lack of standardization. Some arms were longer than others, and some donkeys could carry more than others. The history of weights and measures, therefore, becomes the story of seeking standards. This was not achieved in the OT but began to take place under Greek and Roman influences in NT times.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the measures that were used are frequently attested to in Mesopotamian, Egyptian, and Canaanite literature as well. The Israelites did not have their own unique set of measurements. Yet while the terms are shared, it is not unusual to find a particular term having one value in Israel and a noticeably different value in one of the other cultures.<\/p>\n<p>By the time of the NT, other variables were added. The Israelites of this period were still using many of the measures that had been used and developed throughout the OT period. But added to that were the Greek and Roman systems of measurement. Sometimes these terms were adopted wholesale, while at other times Hebrew terms were adapted to Greco-Roman standards. On still other occasions, the Roman terms were apparently used when dealing with the government, whereas Hebrew terms were still used in everyday practice.<\/p>\n<p>In most of the kinds of measurement, the base unit (i.e., the one that all of the others are fractions or multiples of) is the one about which there is the most uncertainty. So the cubit (length), the shekel (weight), the homer (dry volume), and the bath (liquid volume) are all to some degree uncertain. This makes all of the other measures based on them equally uncertain.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WeightMeasures\">Weight Measures<\/p>\n<p>The terms used for weights have benefited most from archaeological discoveries. Excavations provide stone weights that are occasionally inscribed with the unit they represent. When the stones are weighed, they frequently give a range of weights that have only a general consistency. However, comparing this data with that provided by the text has given the basis for fairly accurate determinations. The relative scale in any given location is more important than absolute values.<\/p>\n\n<p>There was standardization of weight measures, but precision was difficult to attain. The Israelite system is similar to that used by the Mesopotamians and the Canaanites. For most of the OT period, the weights system provided the monetary system. Minted coinage was the invention of the Persians. Up until that time, silver or gold or any other trading commodity had to be weighed out so that bartering or purchasing could take place. This made the weights system the core of the ancient economy. It also explains why the Scriptures speak so seriously against the use of false weights (Lv 19:36; Dt 25:13; Prv 16:11; 20:10, 23; Mi 6:11; Hos 12:7; Am 8:5).<\/p>\n<p>Stone weights were used on a set of balances for conducting business in the ancient marketplace. Scales or balances are mentioned half a dozen times in the OT, but none of those are in actual economic contexts (Jb 6:2; 31:6; Ps 62:9; Is 40:12; Ez 5:1; Dn 5:27). The scales used were generally of the beam-balance type with dishes on each end.<\/p>\n<h5>Talent<\/h5>\n<p>According to Exodus 38:25-26 the talent must have been equal to 3,000 shekels. (A hundred talents would then have been equal to 300,000 shekels, and if that is added to the 1,175 shekels in verse 25, the total is 301,775, or half a shekel for each of the 603,550 men—as verse 26 states.) Excavated talents weigh from about 65 to 80 pounds (29.5 to 36.3 kilograms). In the OT the talent is used only for precious metals, usually silver or gold. According to 1 Kings 10:14, the annual tribute income of Solomon’s kingdom was 666 talents, which apparently was considered quite extravagant. David bequeathed 100,000 talents of gold and 1,000,000 talents of silver to Solomon for the building of the temple (1 Chr 22:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Mina<\/h5>\n<p>In the Canaanite material from Ugarit the mina equals 50 shekels, while in Babylon the mina equals 60 shekels. In Ezekiel 45:12, the mina is set at 60 shekels, but it is unclear whether this represents a change from previous standards.<\/p>\n<h5>Shekel<\/h5>\n<p>The shekel was the basic unit of weight. Besides the regular shekel, there was a “royal” shekel (2 Sm 14:26). Calculating by weights that have been excavated and found labeled as “beka” (one-half shekel), the shekel has been estimated to be about .4 ounce (11.4 grams).<\/p>\n<p>The shekel is used in Scripture almost exclusively in contexts dealing with monetary value. Whether silver, gold, barley, or flour, the shekel valuation assigns the commodity a relative value in the economy. Exceptions to this are Goliath’s armor and spear (1 Sm 17:5-7), which are described in terms of their shekel weight.<\/p>\n<h5>Pim<\/h5>\n<p>The only reference to this unit is in 1 Samuel 13:21, where it is the price charged to the Israelites by the Philistines for sharpening a plowshare. Excavated weights range from .25 to .3 ounce (7.1 to 8.5 grams), suggesting that the pim was two-thirds of a shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Beka<\/h5>\n<p>Seven stones inscribed with this label range in weight from .2 to .23 ounce (5.7 to 6.5 grams). In Exodus 38:26 it is the amount levied on each individual for the census tax. There it is the equivalent of one-half shekel.<\/p>\n<h5>Gerah<\/h5>\n<p>Equal to one-twentieth of a shekel, or .02 ounce (.6 gram). The term is used five times (Ex 30:13; Lv 27:25; Nm 3:47; 18:16; Ez 45:12) and on each occasion is used to give a valuation to the shekel. Its use is strictly monetary in these contexts.<\/p>\n<h5>Litra<\/h5>\n<p>The NT uses the same weights that have already been identified in the OT usage, particularly the shekel, mina, and talent. There is one additional unit used: the litra, which is used in John 12:3 and 19:39 with regard to spices. In Greek literature one litra is approximately 12 ounces (327 grams).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Linear Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Measurements of length and depth generally were derived from a part of the body used to make the measurement. The basic unit was the cubit, and most others were related to it. Precise measurements of geographic distance are lacking in the OT and was most frequently stated in terms of the number of days it would take to arrive at a destination. A single day’s journey was mostly likely 20 to 25 miles (32.2 to 40.2 kilometers). A “pace” was equal to a “step”—about a yard (2 Sm 6:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>The length from the tip of the forefinger to the elbow. There are both long and short cubits, which are used not only in Israel but in Mesopotamia and Egypt as well. Ezekiel 40:5 identifies the long cubit as being the equivalent of a cubit plus a handbreadth (about 20 to 21 inches, or 50.8 to 53.3 centimeters). The inscription found inside the Siloam tunnel built by Hezekiah (715–686 <span>BC<\/span>) indicates that the tunnel is 1,200 cubits long. The actual length of the tunnel was determined to be 1,749 feet (533.1 meters). This would yield a cubit of 17.49 inches (44.4 centimeters). All things considered, 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters) is a good estimation of the length of the cubit in Israel. This would set the long cubit at approximately 20.5 inches (52.1 centimeters). The cubit was most frequently used to give the dimensions of buildings or objects (e.g., curtains, pillars, pieces of furniture, etc.). The largest structure measured in cubits was the ark that Noah built, which was 300 cubits long (Gn 6:15).<\/p>\n<h5>Span<\/h5>\n<p>The distance measured by the stretch of the hand from fingertip to fingertip, equal to one-half a cubit, or eight and three-quarters inches (22.2 centimeters). It is used only seven times in the OT, and four of those are to describe the dimensions of the high priest’s breastplate (Ex 28:15-16; 39:8-9).<\/p>\n<h5>Handbreadth<\/h5>\n<p>The width of the hand at the base, equal to one-sixth of a cubit, one-third of a span, or just under three inches (7.6 centimeters). The term is used only five times and gives the width of the rim around the table of showbread (Ex 25:25) and Solomon’s molten sea (1 Kgs 7:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LinearMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Linear Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT some of the units of length and depth represent Greco-Roman standards, while others are those used in the OT. Like the OT, the NT frequently uses imprecise designations for distance, such as a stone’s throw or a day’s journey. There are, however, a few occurrences of precise terms borrowed from Roman culture.<\/p>\n<h5>Cubit<\/h5>\n<p>For the Romans, the cubit was set at one and a half times their standard foot of 11.66 inches, equaling 17.5 inches (44.5 centimeters), just as the OT cubit.<\/p>\n<h5>Fathom<\/h5>\n<p>The distance between the fingertips of the left and right hand when the arms were outstretched. It is used only in Acts 27:28 and is considered to be about six feet (1.8 meters).<\/p>\n<h5>Furlong\/Stadium<\/h5>\n<p>The length of the ancient Greek racecourse, equal to one-eighth of a Roman mile, or a little over 200 yards (182.9 meters). It is usually used to give approximate distance, but in Revelation 21:16 it is used to give the dimensions of the New Jerusalem and is measured with a measuring rod.<\/p>\n<h5>Mile<\/h5>\n<p>The only occurrence of this term, Matthew 5:41, has reference to the Roman mile of 1,620 yards, about nine-tenths of a modern mile (1.4 kilometers).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheOldTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Amounts of dry goods were oriented toward practical matters such as typical donkey loads, how much seed could be sown in a day, or how much seed would be needed to sow a certain size plot. As with the other types of measures, these then became standardized.<\/p>\n<h5>Cor\/Homer<\/h5>\n<p>The most common dry commodity measure and the equivalent of one donkey load. Estimates of its standard size vary greatly, ranging from 3.8 bushels to 7.5 bushels (133.9 to 264.3 liters). Other than the seven occurrences in Ezekiel 45:11-14, the term occurs only four times in the OT. Three of these contexts feature seed or barley (Lv 27:16; Is 5:10; Hos 3:2), while the fourth is in the context of Israelites gathering quail in the wilderness. A cor is used nine times and occurs with a variety of commodities, including oil, flour, wheat, and barley, in multiples all the way up to 20,000 (1 Kgs 5:11).<\/p>\n<h5>Lethek<\/h5>\n<p>Unit occurring only in Hosea 3:2. The early versions of the Bible identified it as one-half of a cor, or homer.<\/p>\n<h5>Ephah<\/h5>\n<p>This is equal to one-tenth of a homer (Ez 45:11), or one-half of a bushel (17.6 liters). The term occurs dozens of times with all sorts of agricultural products. It seems to have been the unit most used in trading and selling. According to Zechariah 5:6-10, the ephah refers to a container that would hold an ephah of produce, much like the modern-day bushel basket.<\/p>\n<h5>Seah<\/h5>\n<p>A fraction of the homer, which has a very wide range. The term measures flour, seed, barley, and grain, and is roughly one-third of an ephah. A bushel was about five seahs (1 Sm 25:18, <span>nlt<\/span> mg).<\/p>\n<h5>Omer\/Issaron<\/h5>\n<p>The omer occurs only in the account of the collecting of manna by the Israelites (Ex 16:22). It represents a day’s ration of manna and is identified as one-tenth of an ephah (Ex 16:36). The issaron is a term that means a tenth. Its 25 occurrences are all in Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers (mostly in Nm 28–29); it refers only to measures of fine flour.<\/p>\n<h5>Cab, Kab<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in 2 Kings 6:25. The estimate given by Josephus, one-eighteenth of an ephah (or about one-half of an omer), is usually accepted.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CapacityDryMeasureintheNewTestament\">Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following dry measures are used in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Choinix<\/h5>\n<p>Occurring only in Revelation 6:6 (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg), the choinix is a little more than a quart (1.1 liters). In Greek literature it was considered the amount of one man’s daily allowance of corn.<\/p>\n<h5>Modius<\/h5>\n<p>This is the “bushel” under which one’s lamp should not be hid (Mt 5:15; Mk 4:21; Lk 11:33). It is actually equal to about a peck, 7.68 dry quarts (8.5 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Saton<\/h5>\n<p>This is the equivalent of the OT seah and can therefore also be approximated at about a peck. It is used only twice in the NT in parallel passages of the parable of the leaven, which is like the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheOldTestament\">Liquid Measures in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Three basic measures were used for liquids in the OT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>The base unit for the measurement of liquids. The biblical data (Ez 45:11-14) sets it as the liquid equivalent to the dry measure, the ephah. It is one-tenth of a homer. Archaeology has also been able to provide some data for this determination. Jars inscribed as “bath of the king” were found at Lachish and Tell en-Nasbeh, and jars marked “bath” were found at Tell Beit Mirsim. The jars are not complete, so their capacity must be calculated based on a reconstruction. Using this data, the bath was approximately 5.5 gallons (20.8 liters). This estimate would provide acceptable results when factored into the information given in 1 Kings 7:23-26, where the “molten sea” of Solomon’s temple is described as being 30 cubits in circumference, 10 cubits in diameter, 5 cubits deep, and capable of holding 2,000 baths of water.<\/p>\n<h5>Hin<\/h5>\n<p>One-sixth of a hin of water was considered a person’s minimum daily requirement (Ez 4:11). A hin is equal to one-sixth of a bath, approximately one gallon (3.8 liters). It is used for a measure of oil, wine, and water, but no context ever mentions more than one hin. Rather, fractions of a hin are used. Occurrences are limited to Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Ezekiel and are therefore most commonly attested in the context of sacrificial libations.<\/p>\n<h5>Log<\/h5>\n<p>This unit occurs only in Leviticus 14:10-24 and equals one-twelfth of a hin, so about .3 quart or .3 liter.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LiquidMeasuresintheNewTestament\">Liquid Measures in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The following liquid measures occur in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Bath<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only once (Lk 16:6) and is the same as the OT bath.<\/p>\n<h5>Metretes<\/h5>\n<p>This is used only in John 2:6, where it describes the containers in which water was turned to wine. Josephus identifies it as equivalent to a Hebrew bath, but in Greek usage it was the equivalent of about ten gallons (37.9 liters).<\/p>\n<h5>Sextarius\/Xestes<\/h5>\n<p>A measure of capacity equal to about one and one-sixth pints (552 milliliters). In Mark 7:4 the word is translated “pitcher” (<span>nlt<\/span>) or “pot” (<span>kjv<\/span>, see mg).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","summary_en":"WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Preview • Introduction • Weight Measures • Linear Measures in the Old Testament • Linear Measures in the New Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the Old Testament • Capacity (Dry Measure) in the New Testament • Liquid Measures in the Old Testament • Liquid Measures in the New Testament Introduction Units of measure in the ancient world were largely based on practical standards: the length of an arm, a day’s journey, how much a donkey could carry, and so forth. While thi...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":30135,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pharisees","title_en":"Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","summary_en":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34112,"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":37573,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tradition","title_en":"Tradition","content_ro":"<h3>TRADITION<\/h3>\n<p>Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees used the expression “tradition of the elders” when speaking to Jesus about hand washing (Mt 15:2; Mk 7:5). In his response, Jesus referred to the “traditions of men,” thus drawing attention to their human origin. In fact, in Mark 7:8, he definitely set the commandment of God over these traditions, which had become a burden to the people. Jesus strongly criticized the scribes and Pharisees for the way these traditions were enforced (Mt 23). He noted that adherence to the tradition had become more important than the moral and personal effect of the teaching.<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Pharisees; Talmud; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRADITION<\/h3>\n<p>Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees used the expression “tradition of the elders” when speaking to Jesus about hand washing (Mt 15:2; Mk 7:5). In his response, Jesus referred to the “traditions of men,” thus drawing attention to their human origin. In fact, in Mark 7:8, he definitely set the commandment of God over these traditions, which had become a burden to the people. Jesus strongly criticized the scribes and Pharisees for the way these traditions were enforced (Mt 23). He noted that adherence to the tradition had become more important than the moral and personal effect of the teaching.<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Pharisees; Talmud; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRADITION Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was Pirke Aboth (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law...","summary_en":"TRADITION Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was Pirke Aboth (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55294,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","summary_en":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82920,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","summary_en":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110546,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","summary_en":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138172,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:5<\/strong> Since <em>the Pharisees<\/em> believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","summary_en":"7:5 Since the Pharisees believed that their oral traditions were given to Moses as part of God’s divine revelation, they asked Jesus why his disciples did not keep them. After all, teachers were responsible for the behavior of their disciples (see 2:24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":41887,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69513,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97139,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124765,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Isaiah","title_en":"Isaiah","content_ro":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their sons were Shear-jashub (7:3) and Maher-shalal-hash-baz (8:3).<\/p>\n<p>Isaiah opposed social and political evil at all levels. He censured fortune-tellers. He rebuked kings for their willfulness and indifference. He denounced wealthy, influential people who ignored their responsibilities. And he exhorted everyone to obey God’s covenant. Isaiah opposed Canaanite idolatry and insincere religious observances (1:10-17; 29:13), proclaiming judgment and declaring that only a righteous remnant would survive (6:11-13). He foretold the coming Messiah, the peaceful prince of God’s kingdom (9:6-7; 11:1-11) who was also an obedient, suffering servant (53:3-12). The book of Isaiah has more overtones of the New Testament than any other Old Testament book and is frequently cited by New Testament authors.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Kgs 19:1–20:19; 2 Chr 26:22; 32:20, 32; Isa 1:1–66:24; Matt 3:3; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:14-15; 15:7-9; Mark 1:2-3; 7:6-7; Luke 3:4-6; 4:17-19; John 1:23; 12:38-41; Acts 8:28-34; 28:25-27; Rom 9:27-29; 10:15-16, 20-21; 15:12; Gal 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","summary_en":"Isaiah Isaiah was a Judean prophet during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. He was the son of Amoz (Isa 1:1) and was possibly related to King Amaziah. He lived in Jerusalem, was well educated, and had deep insight into human nature. He had a long ministry (about 740~685 BC); as Judah’s political and religious counselor, he had access to kings and was apparently the court historian (2 Chr 26:22; 32:32). Isaiah’s wife was called a “prophetess” (see Study Note on Isa 8:3); their ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4874,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16536,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Holiness","title_en":"Holiness","content_ro":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOLINESS<\/h3>\n<p>Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct from his creation and exercises sovereign majesty and power over it. His holiness is especially prominent in the Psalms (47:8) and the Prophets (Ez 39:7), where “holiness” emerges as a synonym for Israel’s God. Thus, Scripture ascribes to God the title “Holy” (Is 57:15), “Holy One” (Jb 6:10; Is 43:15), and “Holy One of Israel” (Ps 89:18; Is 60:14; Jer 50:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God’s holiness denotes that the Lord is separate from all that is evil and defiled (cf. Jb 34:10). His holy character is the standard of absolute moral perfection (Is 5:16). God’s holiness—his transcendent majesty and the purity of his character—are skillfully balanced in Psalm 99. Verses 1 through 3 portray God’s distance from the finite and earthbound, whereas verses 4 and 5 emphasize his separation from sin and evil.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God demanded holiness in the lives of his people. Through Moses, God said to the congregation of Israel, “You shall be holy; for I the <span>Lord<\/span> your God am holy” (Lv 19:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). The holiness enjoined by the OT was twofold: (1) external, or ceremonial; and (2) internal, or moral and spiritual. OT ceremonial holiness, prescribed in the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT) included ritual consecration to God’s service. Thus priests and Levites were sanctified by a complex process of ritual consecration (Ex 29), as were the Hebrew Nazirites, which means “separated ones” (Nm 6:1-21). Prophets like Elisha (2 Kgs 4:9) and Jeremiah (Jer 1:5) were also sanctified for a special prophetic ministry in Israel.<\/p>\n<p>But the OT also draws attention to the inner, moral, and spiritual aspects of holiness. Men and women, created in the image of God, are called to cultivate the holiness of God’s own character in their lives (Lv 19:2; Nm 15:40). In the NT the ceremonial holiness prominent in the Pentateuch recedes to the background. Whereas much of Judaism in Jesus’ time sought a ceremonial holiness by works (Mk 7:1-5), the NT stresses the ethical rather than the formal dimension of holiness (vv 6-12). With the coming of the Holy Spirit, the early church perceived that holiness of life was a profound internal reality that should govern an individual’s thought and attitudes in relation to persons and objects in the external world.<\/p>\n<p>The NT Greek equivalent of the common Hebrew word for holiness signifies an inner state of freedom from moral fault and a relative harmony with the moral perfection of God. The word “godlikeness” or “godliness” captures the sense of the primary Greek word for holiness. Another Greek word approximates the dominant OT concept of holiness as external separation from the profane and dedication to the service of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Because the NT writers assumed the OT portrait of deity, holiness is ascribed to God in relatively few apostolic texts. Jesus affirmed the ethical nature of God when he enjoined his disciples to pray that the Father’s name might be esteemed for what it is: “Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). In the book of Revelation the Father’s moral perfection is extolled with the threefold ascription of holiness borrowed from Isaiah: “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come” (Rv 4:8, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Is 6:3). Luke, however, contemplated God’s holiness in terms of the dominant OT concept of his transcendence and majesty (Lk 1:49).<\/p>\n<p>Similarly the holiness of Jesus Christ is asserted in the NT. Luke (Lk 1:35; 4:34), Peter (Acts 3:14; 4:27-30), the writer of Hebrews (Heb 7:26), and John (Rv 3:7) ascribe holiness to both the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Spirit comes from God, discloses his holy character, and is the instrument of God’s holy purposes in the world, he also is absolutely holy (Mt 1:18; 3:16; 28:19; Lk 1:15; 4:14). The common title “Holy Spirit” underscores the ethical perfection of the third person of the Godhead (Jn 3:5-8; 14:16-17, 26).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, holiness also characterizes Christ’s church. The apostle Paul taught that Christ loved the church and died for it “that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word” (Eph 5:26, <span>rsv<\/span>). Peter addressed the church as a holy people in language borrowed from the OT. Separated from the unbelieving nations and consecrated to the Lord, the church is “a holy nation” (1 Pt 2:9; cf. Ex 19:6).<\/p>\n<p>But the NT more often discusses holiness in relation to individual Christians. Believers in Christ are frequently designated as “saints,” literally meaning “holy ones,” since through faith God justifies sinners, pronouncing them “holy” in his sight. A justified sinner is by no means morally perfect, but God does declare believers to be guiltless. Thus, although Christians at Corinth, for example, were plagued with numerous sins, Paul could address his erring friends as those who were “sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints” (1 Cor 1:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). Despite their problems, the Corinthian believers were “holy ones” in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The NT, however, places great stress upon the reality of practical holiness in the Christian’s daily experience. The God who freely declares a person righteous through faith in Christ commands that the believer progress in holiness of life. In God’s plan, a growth in holiness should accompany believing. God graciously provides the spiritual resources to enable Christians to be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pt 1:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","summary_en":"HOLINESS Chief attribute of God and a quality to be developed in his people. “Holiness” and the adjective “holy” occur more than 900 times in the Bible. The primary OT word for holiness means “to cut” or “to separate.” Fundamentally, holiness is a cutting off or separation from what is unclean and a consecration to what is pure. In the OT, holiness as applied to God signifies his transcendence over creation and the moral perfection of his character. God is holy in that he is utterly distinct ...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":34115,"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":55295,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","summary_en":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82921,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","summary_en":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110547,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","summary_en":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138173,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:6-8<\/strong> Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the <em>farce<\/em> of equating <em>man-made ideas<\/em> with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human <em>tradition<\/em> for <em>God’s law<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","summary_en":"7:6-8 Jesus first responds by quoting Isa 29:13 (Greek version), which deals with the farce of equating man-made ideas with God’s commands. It describes well the situation in which the Pharisees had substituted their human tradition for God’s law.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":37574,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tradition","title_en":"Tradition","content_ro":"<h3>TRADITION<\/h3>\n<p>Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees used the expression “tradition of the elders” when speaking to Jesus about hand washing (Mt 15:2; Mk 7:5). In his response, Jesus referred to the “traditions of men,” thus drawing attention to their human origin. In fact, in Mark 7:8, he definitely set the commandment of God over these traditions, which had become a burden to the people. Jesus strongly criticized the scribes and Pharisees for the way these traditions were enforced (Mt 23). He noted that adherence to the tradition had become more important than the moral and personal effect of the teaching.<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Pharisees; Talmud; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRADITION<\/h3>\n<p>Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees used the expression “tradition of the elders” when speaking to Jesus about hand washing (Mt 15:2; Mk 7:5). In his response, Jesus referred to the “traditions of men,” thus drawing attention to their human origin. In fact, in Mark 7:8, he definitely set the commandment of God over these traditions, which had become a burden to the people. Jesus strongly criticized the scribes and Pharisees for the way these traditions were enforced (Mt 23). He noted that adherence to the tradition had become more important than the moral and personal effect of the teaching.<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Judaism; Law, Biblical Concept of; Pharisees; Talmud; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRADITION Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was Pirke Aboth (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law...","summary_en":"TRADITION Respect for tradition was particularly strong among Jews during the period at the beginning of the Christian era. Among these traditions, the most important collection was Pirke Aboth (Traditions of the Fathers). This consisted of comments by famous rabbis in explanation of the written Law. This and a growing collection of other rabbinic traditions interpreting the Law became an authoritative commentary on the written code. This collection was esteemed to be equal to the written Law...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66803,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94429,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122055,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149681,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Limitations of Law","title_en":"The Limitations of Law","content_ro":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Limitations of Law<\/h3>\n<p>The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and brought death (see 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>Paul wants his readers to realize that the law is not at fault, however. God’s law is good and holy (Rom 7:12), but it is powerless to change the human heart. Whether we conclude that Paul (in Romans 7:14-25) is describing the experience of an unbeliever, a mature believer, or an immature believer, the point remains that human sin cannot be overcome by the law. God’s law is given to people who, because of their connection with Adam, are already locked under sin’s power. They may want to do what God tells them, but they find that they cannot. Deliverance can come only through a new and radical experience of God’s power and grace in Jesus Christ (Rom 7:25). Through God’s Spirit, Jesus rescues us from “the power of sin that leads to death” (Rom 8:2).<\/p>\n<p>If God’s good and holy law cannot rescue us from our predicament and save us, how much less helpful are all human laws that people rely on for religious or spiritual well-being. Whether those laws come from a religious figure, a tradition we have inherited, or a church we attend, none of them can change the human soul. They can tell us what to do, but they cannot empower us to do it. God’s law can provide guidelines in the new life God has given us by grace, but it can never substitute for the power of God’s grace, made available through the work of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:1-33; 6:17-25; Josh 24:19-27; Ezra 7:25-26; Pss 1:1-3; 19:7-14; 78:56-59; 119:144; Isa 24:5; 26:4-8; Jer 31:33-34; Hos 4:6; 8:12; Hab 1:4; Matt 5:17-20; 7:12; Mark 7:8-9; Luke 16:16-17; John 1:16-17; 7:19; Acts 13:38-39; Rom 2:13-29; 3:19-21, 27-28; 4:13-16; 7:1-25; 8:3-4, 7; 9:4, 31-32; 10:3-5; Gal 2:16-21; 3:2, 10-13, 17-25; 5:1-4; 1 Tim 1:5-11; Heb 8:7-13; 10:1-18; 1 Jn 3:4-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","summary_en":"The Limitations of Law The law was central to God’s covenant with the people of Israel, and many Jews in Paul’s day (including Jewish Christians) still saw it as critical to how God’s people lived. Therefore, Paul frequently deals with questions about the law, especially in his letters to the Romans and the Galatians. The pinnacle of his treatment comes in Romans 7, where Paul powerfully argues that the law of Moses, rather than having a positive effect on people’s lives, stimulated sin and b...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":24377,"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":36731,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Talmud*","title_en":"Talmud*","content_ro":"<h3>TALMUD*<\/h3>\n<p>Word meaning “to study,” “to learn.” It is a body of literature in Hebrew and Aramaic, covering interpretations of legal portions of the OT, as well as wise sayings from many rabbinical sources; it spans a time period from shortly after Ezra, about 400 <span>BC<\/span>, until approximately the <span>AD<\/span> 500s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandDevelopmentoftheOralLaw\">Origin and Development of the Oral Law<\/p>\n<p>Traditional Jews believe that a second law was given to Moses in addition to the first or written word; this second one was given orally, and handed down from generation to generation in oral form. The Talmud itself makes this claim for an early origin, and <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> 1:1 states that it is attributed to Moses. Other scholars do not agree on this origin of the oral law and insist that it had its beginning and development after Ezra. For example, there is no mention by the preexilic prophets concerning a lapse from the oral law, but the messages of the prophets abound in warnings about abandoning the written revelation given to Moses, thereby indicating the absence of a body of oral tradition prior to the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>In the period succeeding Ezra (“a scribe skilled in the law of Moses,” Ezr 7:6), teacher succeeded teacher in synagogues and schools, and their understanding of the OT was treasured and memorized. Across the centuries, many memorizing devices were employed to learn and remember the growing mass of opinions and interpretation. But eventually not even the best memory could retain all the available materials. It was finally necessary to compile a summary of all the essential teachings of preceding generations, and also to facilitate access for future generations to the immense treasure of thought, religious feeling, and wisdom for guidance and inspiration. The compilation is known as the Talmud, the basic repository of the oral law. Jewish people regard it as second to the Scriptures. A literature recognized as the genius of a national and religious creation, it has a profound influence upon the development of the Jewish world view.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RationaleforanOralLaw\">Rationale for an Oral Law<\/p>\n<p>With the cessation of the postexilic prophets, and with the continual development of the complexity of life in Israel and its relationships to the outer world, there arose a need for further elaboration of the laws of the Pentateuch. The oral law, at first, was intended to be helpful so that people could obey the written Word of God.<\/p>\n<p>The oral law contained in the Talmud has a twofold function. First, it provided an interpretation of the written Law. According to the rabbis, this is necessary since the oral law makes it possible to observe the written Law. Without the former, it would be impossible to observe the latter. A good example is the concept of not working, as indicated by the biblical Sabbath law. Everyone knew that work was not done on the Sabbath. The rabbis contend, however, that it took the oral law to define what was meant by work.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of the oral law is that it modifies and seeks to adapt the written Law to fit new conditions and circumstances. The oral law is supposed to make the written Law a viable document from generation to generation. Without this oral law, the written Law would become obsolete. Therefore, the oral law is necessary for observance of prohibitions as well as for stressing what is good Jewish devotion and loyalty.<\/p>\n<p>It is true that every generation must face new social, political, and economic conditions, which make necessary a different application of the Word of God. But the Word of God cannot be changed in order to accommodate personal desires or interpret new problems in different ages. Something of this is apparent in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, when Jesus challenged the Jewish leaders for having preempted the Word of God by their oral traditions (Mk 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicAntecedentstotheTalmud\">Basic Antecedents to the Talmud<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest means for teaching oral law was a running commentary, or Midrash (“to expound”), of the biblical text. If the teaching handled the legal portions of the OT, then it was referred to as Midrash Halakah (the latter emphasized a way by which one walks or lives). When treating nonlegal, ethical, or devotional portions of the OT, then the opinions and understanding was called Midrash Haggadah (“narration”). Ezra and his trained associates were using the method of Midrash, upon the occasion of the completion of the Jerusalem wall in 444 <span>BC<\/span>, when they “explained the law to the people while the people remained in their place. They read from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading” (Neh 8:7-8, <span>nasb<\/span>). This kind of oral Midrash is the method followed by generations of teachers after Ezra, when the religious leaders were known as Soferim (“bookmen” or “scribes”), until about 200 <span>BC<\/span>. Sometimes referred to as the “Great Synagogue,” these scholars provided teaching to “hedge” the revealed moral and ceremonial word so that Israel would never stray into idolatry or ignorance again. The Soferim were succeeded by the Hasidim (“pious ones”), who tried to maintain a high level of religious devotion. In turn, the Hasidim were succeeded by the Pharisees (“separated ones”) at about 128 <span>BC<\/span>. Each of these groups contributed to the Midrash method. This material continued to increase and was transmitted orally. Succeeding generations learned these materials through continuous repetition. Therefore, the new method was called Mishnah (“repetition”), and the teachers of the Mishnah were known as Tannaim (“those who handed down orally”). Both Midrash and Mishnah existed side by side in ensuing generations. There came a time, however, when it was necessary to codify the oral law covered by Mishnah, since this became cumbersome to learn as a body of material. Eventually, this material was put into writing; it came to be known as Gemara (“completion”). The combination of Gemara and Mishnah constitute the Talmud.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gemara; Haggadah; Halakah; Law, Biblical Concept of; Midrash; Mishnah; Pharisees; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TALMUD*<\/h3>\n<p>Word meaning “to study,” “to learn.” It is a body of literature in Hebrew and Aramaic, covering interpretations of legal portions of the OT, as well as wise sayings from many rabbinical sources; it spans a time period from shortly after Ezra, about 400 <span>BC<\/span>, until approximately the <span>AD<\/span> 500s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginandDevelopmentoftheOralLaw\">Origin and Development of the Oral Law<\/p>\n<p>Traditional Jews believe that a second law was given to Moses in addition to the first or written word; this second one was given orally, and handed down from generation to generation in oral form. The Talmud itself makes this claim for an early origin, and <em>Pirke Aboth<\/em> 1:1 states that it is attributed to Moses. Other scholars do not agree on this origin of the oral law and insist that it had its beginning and development after Ezra. For example, there is no mention by the preexilic prophets concerning a lapse from the oral law, but the messages of the prophets abound in warnings about abandoning the written revelation given to Moses, thereby indicating the absence of a body of oral tradition prior to the Babylonian exile.<\/p>\n<p>In the period succeeding Ezra (“a scribe skilled in the law of Moses,” Ezr 7:6), teacher succeeded teacher in synagogues and schools, and their understanding of the OT was treasured and memorized. Across the centuries, many memorizing devices were employed to learn and remember the growing mass of opinions and interpretation. But eventually not even the best memory could retain all the available materials. It was finally necessary to compile a summary of all the essential teachings of preceding generations, and also to facilitate access for future generations to the immense treasure of thought, religious feeling, and wisdom for guidance and inspiration. The compilation is known as the Talmud, the basic repository of the oral law. Jewish people regard it as second to the Scriptures. A literature recognized as the genius of a national and religious creation, it has a profound influence upon the development of the Jewish world view.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RationaleforanOralLaw\">Rationale for an Oral Law<\/p>\n<p>With the cessation of the postexilic prophets, and with the continual development of the complexity of life in Israel and its relationships to the outer world, there arose a need for further elaboration of the laws of the Pentateuch. The oral law, at first, was intended to be helpful so that people could obey the written Word of God.<\/p>\n<p>The oral law contained in the Talmud has a twofold function. First, it provided an interpretation of the written Law. According to the rabbis, this is necessary since the oral law makes it possible to observe the written Law. Without the former, it would be impossible to observe the latter. A good example is the concept of not working, as indicated by the biblical Sabbath law. Everyone knew that work was not done on the Sabbath. The rabbis contend, however, that it took the oral law to define what was meant by work.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of the oral law is that it modifies and seeks to adapt the written Law to fit new conditions and circumstances. The oral law is supposed to make the written Law a viable document from generation to generation. Without this oral law, the written Law would become obsolete. Therefore, the oral law is necessary for observance of prohibitions as well as for stressing what is good Jewish devotion and loyalty.<\/p>\n<p>It is true that every generation must face new social, political, and economic conditions, which make necessary a different application of the Word of God. But the Word of God cannot be changed in order to accommodate personal desires or interpret new problems in different ages. Something of this is apparent in the first century <span>AD<\/span>, when Jesus challenged the Jewish leaders for having preempted the Word of God by their oral traditions (Mk 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicAntecedentstotheTalmud\">Basic Antecedents to the Talmud<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest means for teaching oral law was a running commentary, or Midrash (“to expound”), of the biblical text. If the teaching handled the legal portions of the OT, then it was referred to as Midrash Halakah (the latter emphasized a way by which one walks or lives). When treating nonlegal, ethical, or devotional portions of the OT, then the opinions and understanding was called Midrash Haggadah (“narration”). Ezra and his trained associates were using the method of Midrash, upon the occasion of the completion of the Jerusalem wall in 444 <span>BC<\/span>, when they “explained the law to the people while the people remained in their place. They read from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading” (Neh 8:7-8, <span>nasb<\/span>). This kind of oral Midrash is the method followed by generations of teachers after Ezra, when the religious leaders were known as Soferim (“bookmen” or “scribes”), until about 200 <span>BC<\/span>. Sometimes referred to as the “Great Synagogue,” these scholars provided teaching to “hedge” the revealed moral and ceremonial word so that Israel would never stray into idolatry or ignorance again. The Soferim were succeeded by the Hasidim (“pious ones”), who tried to maintain a high level of religious devotion. In turn, the Hasidim were succeeded by the Pharisees (“separated ones”) at about 128 <span>BC<\/span>. Each of these groups contributed to the Midrash method. This material continued to increase and was transmitted orally. Succeeding generations learned these materials through continuous repetition. Therefore, the new method was called Mishnah (“repetition”), and the teachers of the Mishnah were known as Tannaim (“those who handed down orally”). Both Midrash and Mishnah existed side by side in ensuing generations. There came a time, however, when it was necessary to codify the oral law covered by Mishnah, since this became cumbersome to learn as a body of material. Eventually, this material was put into writing; it came to be known as Gemara (“completion”). The combination of Gemara and Mishnah constitute the Talmud.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gemara; Haggadah; Halakah; Law, Biblical Concept of; Midrash; Mishnah; Pharisees; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TALMUD* Word meaning “to study,” “to learn.” It is a body of literature in Hebrew and Aramaic, covering interpretations of legal portions of the OT, as well as wise sayings from many rabbinical sources; it spans a time period from shortly after Ezra, about 400 BC, until approximately the AD 500s. Origin and Development of the Oral Law Traditional Jews believe that a second law was given to Moses in addition to the first or written word; this second one was given orally, and handed down from g...","summary_en":"TALMUD* Word meaning “to study,” “to learn.” It is a body of literature in Hebrew and Aramaic, covering interpretations of legal portions of the OT, as well as wise sayings from many rabbinical sources; it spans a time period from shortly after Ezra, about 400 BC, until approximately the AD 500s. Origin and Development of the Oral Law Traditional Jews believe that a second law was given to Moses in addition to the first or written word; this second one was given orally, and handed down from g...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55296,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","summary_en":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82922,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","summary_en":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110548,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","summary_en":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138174,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:9","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:9-13<\/strong> Next, Jesus provides an <em>instance<\/em> where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted <em>God’s law<\/em> and allowed them to <em>sidestep<\/em> its requirements.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","summary_en":"7:9-13 Next, Jesus provides an instance where the Pharisees’ traditions contradicted God’s law and allowed them to sidestep its requirements.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60508,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Concern for the Poor","title_en":"Concern for the Poor","content_ro":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","summary_en":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63613,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Children and Parents","title_en":"Children and Parents","content_ro":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","summary_en":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88134,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Concern for the Poor","title_en":"Concern for the Poor","content_ro":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","summary_en":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91239,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Children and Parents","title_en":"Children and Parents","content_ro":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","summary_en":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115760,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Concern for the Poor","title_en":"Concern for the Poor","content_ro":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","summary_en":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118865,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Children and Parents","title_en":"Children and Parents","content_ro":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","summary_en":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143386,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Concern for the Poor","title_en":"Concern for the Poor","content_ro":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Concern for the Poor<\/h3>\n<p>God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left for the needy (see Lev 23:22). Those who were destitute were not to be victimized. Instead, loans were to be made without interest, or the debtor was to be allowed to work off his debt with dignity as a bondservant (25:35-42). These positive steps ensured that the poor had food to eat.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible first mentions concern for the poor in the radical accommodations of the offering system to those unable to afford more costly offerings. Birds could be substituted for lambs in the whole burnt offering (1:14-17) and the sin offering (5:7-10), and there were other such concessions in the cleansing rituals (14:21-22). Perhaps the most striking is in the substitution of flour for the sin offering (5:11-13). The life-for-a-life symbolism is forfeited for economic reasons, showing clearly God’s desire that the poor who cannot afford a lamb should nonetheless be able to experience forgiveness of sins.<\/p>\n<p>This theme is continued in the prophets’ concern for the poor and helpless and their pleas for social justice and compassion (e.g., Isa 1:17; Amos 2:6). The prophets had some strong words for those responsible for oppressing the needy (see e.g., 4:1-3; 8:4-8). The worship practices of the people—no matter how lavish—were not accepted by God if, at the same time, those worshiping were guilty of injustice and oppression (see Isa 1:15-20; Mic 6:6-8). This notion that proper attitudes and actions toward God and others are more important than the practice of worship rituals is reflected in the story in the Gospels of the poor widow’s offering. Her offering receives praise from Jesus, not because of its monetary value, but because of the devotion it represented (Mark 12:41-44). Religious practices could even inhibit helping those in need (see Mark 7:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and the early church exhibited concern for the poor. Jesus indicated that a major component of his mission was to bring hope to the poor and release for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). He warned strongly against neglecting the poor (Luke 16:19-31) and indicated that a willingness to provide for the poor was necessary for those desiring to be his followers (see Luke 18:18-23). Reflecting the teaching of Christ, the early church sought to ensure that the needy among them were well cared for (Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32-37; 1 Tim 5:3-16). As in the prophets, the mistreatment of the marginalized made a farce of religious practice (1 Cor 11:17-29; Jas 1:27–2:17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s concern for the poor is thus a theme that runs throughout Scripture, and believers must take up a similar perspective toward those in need.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 22:22-27; 23:6-11; Lev 5:7, 11; 14:21-22; 19:9-10; 23:22; Deut 10:17-19; 15:4-11; 16:9-12; 24:6-22; 26:12-13; 27:17-19; 1 Sam 2:8; Ps 10:13-18; 35:10; 68:5; Prov 14:31; Isa 1:15-17; Amos 2:6; 4:1; 8:4-7; Mic 6:6-8, 12; Mark 12:41-44; Luke 6:20; 14:12-14; Jas 2:1-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","summary_en":"Concern for the Poor God commanded Israel to show concern for its people’s well-being. Israel’s covenant with God, together with its self-concept as an extended family, exerted a leveling effect that resisted pretensions to privilege. A family should provide for members who are facing difficulty. These members of the Israelite people included widows and orphans (Exod 22:22), the poor, and foreigners (Lev 19:10). The edges of the fields and the gleanings of field and vineyard were to be left f...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146491,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Children and Parents","title_en":"Children and Parents","content_ro":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Children and Parents<\/h3>\n<p>Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly behavior, parents are to instruct their children in the ways of the Lord (Deut 6:1-25; Prov 20:7; 22:6), and they are to inform them about his great deeds in history (Ps 78:1-8). This knowledge will lead children to obedience and blessing. Children, for their part, must show godly parents the respect that is due to them (Prov 20:20; 30:11-14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>Proverbs affirms the power and impact of a strong, cohesive family that loves and follows God. The book has strong warnings for those who would disrupt a family (6:16-19; 11:29), and it heaps great praise on those who build up the family (see 14:1). A family that lives in dependence on the Lord can truly flourish (Pss 127–128).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 5:16; 6:1-9, 20-25; 7:3-6; Pss 78:1-8; 103:13; 127:1–128:6; Prov 1:8-9; 3:1-2; 4:1-4; 10:1; 11:21, 29; 12:7; 13:22; 14:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25; 19:18, 26; 20:7, 20; 22:6, 15; 23:13-14; 29:15, 17; 30:11-14, 17; Mark 7:9-13; Luke 1:17; 18:29-30; Eph 6:1-4<\/p>","summary_ro":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","summary_en":"Children and Parents Wise children bring great joy to their parents, while foolish children cause them much grief (Prov 10:1; 15:20; 17:21, 25). This observation motivates parents to guide their children into wisdom and encourages children to pay attention to wise instruction (19:26-27). When children need discipline, parents should not shirk their responsibility, because the consequences are dangerous to the child (19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14). Through the example of their own wise and godly beha...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":11404,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Exodus","title_en":"Book of Exodus","content_ro":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXODUS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives the basis for this religious, political, and social life.<\/p>\n<p>Theologically, the book of Exodus is so frequently referred to in the OT and NT that theologians speak of an “exodus motif.” In Psalm 68, for example, David received assurance in remembering that his God was the same one who rescued Israel from Egypt. The prophet Jeremiah compared the future regathering of Israel to their exodus from Egypt as an even more miraculous event (Jer 16:14-15). The return of Jesus and his parents from Egypt is associated with the exodus in Matthew 2:13-15. The deliverance of the Jewish people from Egypt was interpreted as a prototype for God’s freeing of all his people, both Israel and the church. Thus, the message of the book of Exodus is foundational to understanding God’s plan of salvation throughout the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The English title “Exodus” comes from the Septuagint, a pre-Christian translation of the OT into Greek. The word means “a way out” or “departure” and refers to Israel’s rescue from Egypt. The Hebrew title is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Shemoth<\/span> (“these are the names”), from the book’s opening words, referring to the names of the sons of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>According to tradition, Exodus and the entire Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) were written by Moses. Exodus was probably written at Mt Sinai or shortly after the events there, according to this view. There is much to support that claim: (1) The book states that Moses wrote God’s words in at least one book (Ex 17:14; 24:2, 7; 34:27-28). According to Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, Moses recorded God’s law in a book that was deposited beside the ark of the covenant as a witness for God. (2) Many OT writers referred to portions of Exodus as the “law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3; 2 Chr 34:14; Neh 8:1; 13:1). The NT, including the testimony of Jesus, calls Moses the author (Mk 7:10; 12:26; Jn 1:45; 7:19).<\/p>\n<p>Various other theories about the origin of Exodus have been proposed. Some scholars credit Moses with writing nearly the entire book. One writer claims that Moses was an unknown desert sheikh who never even met the Israelites. Some critics think they detect in the book several documents from various periods in Israel’s history that were finally put together by an editor centuries after Moses’ death. Others have isolated various literary forms, such as the “Song of Moses” (Ex 15), and traced their development. Another interpretation says that the exodus story was passed on by word of mouth for many generations before being written.<\/p>\n<p>Although such theories are held by biblical scholars, they deny what the text of the book repeatedly affirms: that Moses wrote Exodus. The book of Exodus contains evidence of being written by an eyewitness. Only such a person would recall, for example, that there were 12 fountains and 70 palm trees at Elim (Ex 15:27). The author shows a thorough knowledge of Egyptian court life, customs, and language. Some of the materials used to construct the tabernacle, such as acacia wood for its furniture (25:10) and rams’ skins for the outer covering (v 5), are found in Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula but not in Palestine. The book thus seems to have had a desert setting.<\/p>\n<p>Moses was not only commissioned by God to write the book of Exodus, but he was also well qualified. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and he was mighty in his words and deeds” (Acts 7:22, <span>rsv<\/span>). In addition, the 40 years spent in the wilderness of Midian and Sinai gave him a thorough knowledge of the geography and wildlife of the regions through which the Israelites traveled. The events of the exodus—deliverance from the Egyptians and God’s giving of the law—were so central to the history of Israel that Moses took special care to preserve the record so it could be passed on to following generations.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>If one accepts the traditional view that Moses wrote Exodus, then the book is to be dated in the time of Moses. Two dates are generally suggested for the exodus from Egypt.<\/p>\n\n<h5>The “Late Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh who oppressed the Israelites was Seti I (Sethos, c. 1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Ramses II (c. 1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). The exodus would thus have occurred in 1290, and the conquest of Canaan would have begun in 1250. There are two principal arguments for this view: (1) According to Exodus 1:11, the Israelites were forced to build the store city of Rameses; therefore, Ramses II must have been ruling at the time. But the city of Rameses could have existed earlier under a different name and then been renamed after Ramses II when he rebuilt it. Or there could have been an earlier monarch named Ramses who commissioned its construction. (2) There is archaeological evidence of movements of people and widespread destruction in Canaan around 1250 <span>BC<\/span>. If this destruction was caused by the Hebrew conquest under Joshua, it would place the exodus around 1290. But it could just as easily have been the result of social turbulence and anarchy in the period of the Israelite judges, or of the military activities of neighboring peoples.<\/p>\n<h5>The “Early Date” View<\/h5>\n<p>This view says that the pharaoh of the oppression was Thutmose III (c. 1504–1450 <span>BC<\/span>) and the pharaoh of the exodus was Amenhotep II (c. 1450–1424 <span>BC<\/span>). Thus, the exodus would have occurred about 1440, and the conquest would have begun around 1400. Three chief arguments support that view: (1) If the fourth year of King Solomon was 966 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 would place the exodus at 1446. (2) If the time of Jephthah was 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, then the 300 years of Judges 11:26 would date the conquest at 1400. (3) The late date would not leave enough time for the period of the judges, which most chronologies indicate lasted between 300 and 400 years. On the basis of such biblical references to the date of the exodus, the early date appears preferable.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>Some events in Egypt during the period covered by the book of Exodus shed additional light on the biblical record. Exodus 12:40 records that the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years. That would place the settling of Jacob and his family in Goshen (Gn 47:4, 11) at about 1870 <span>BC<\/span>, during the powerful 12th dynasty of Egypt’s Middle Kingdom. Around the turn of the century, two weaker dynasties followed. Semite invaders from Asia began to infiltrate northern (or Lower) Egypt. Those outsiders, known as the Hyksos, were able to displace the native dynasty with their own king around 1730. That was the “new king” who “did not know Joseph” (Ex 1:8). Being foreigners themselves, they were naturally concerned about the Israelites, who were too many and too mighty for them (v 9). Enslavement was the easiest solution to the problem of the Israelites. The Hyksos kings could use the new source of labor to enlarge Rameses, at that time the capital of Lower Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Not until about 1580 <span>BC<\/span> were the Egyptians, led by Ahmose, able to drive out the Hyksos and reestablish an Egyptian line of kings. Because the Israelites were still multiplying, despite their hard labor, the pharaohs of the 18th dynasty continued their bondage and decreed that all male children must be killed. When Moses was born (c. 1560 <span>BC<\/span>), that edict was still in effect. Thutmose I (1539–1514), the great empire builder and third of that dynasty, was pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>Thutmose I’s only surviving legal heir was a daughter, Hatshepsut. Her husband assumed the name Thutmose II (1514–1504). When he died, another of the pharaoh’s descendants was named the successor—Thutmose III (1504–1450), who was ten years old at the time. Hatshepsut took the kingdom from the young ruler and controlled it for 22 years (1503–1482). Such a strong-willed woman could have the nerve to disobey her father’s command by saving the life of a Hebrew baby and raising him in the palace at Thebes.<\/p>\n<p>Hatshepsut, who continued to rule despite Thutmose III’s coronation, possibly intended for Moses to have the throne, or at least a high position in the realm. Thutmose III, once he had full power after Hatshepsut’s death, would have been eager to do away with Moses. Moses’ hurried flight into the wilderness after killing the overseer fits well with such historical possibilities. Thutmose III’s death in 1450 <span>BC<\/span> opened the way for Moses to return and confront Pharaoh Amenhotep II with God’s command, “Let my people go.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of the book of Exodus is to show how God’s promise to Abraham (Gn 15:12-16) was fulfilled when the Lord rescued the Israelite descendants of Abraham from Egyptian bondage. It also explains the origin of the Passover festival, the beginning of the nation by God’s establishment of a covenant with Israel, and the giving of the law on Mt Sinai.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus tells the moving story of a mighty God, creator of the universe, beyond all limitations of time and space, who intervenes in history on behalf of a helpless group of slaves. God defeats the ruler of the greatest empire on earth and then leads his oppressed people from that land to freedom. Exodus is the story of a single family that providentially grows into a multitude. Through God’s covenant a nation is formed, and through his law the nation is given stability and set apart from all its neighbors. The book of Exodus tells of an unusual man, whose 80 years of preparation are equally divided between the palace of a king and the pasture of a nomadic priest. Moses is a reluctant leader, but he defies the pharaoh, speaks with God face-to-face, and writes nearly one-fourth of the Hebrew Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>The God of Exodus is faithful. He makes promises and keeps them. Genesis 15:13-16 records an amazing prophecy: “Then the <span>Lord<\/span> said to Abram, ‘Know of a surety that your descendants will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment on the nation which they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. . . . And they shall come back here in the fourth generation’ ” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In response to this promise, Joseph, “at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his burial” (Heb 11:22, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>That promise provides a background for the drama of redemption on which the book of Exodus focuses. Redemption can be defined as “deliverance from the power of an alien dominion, and enjoyment of the resulting freedom.” It speaks of a deliverer and what he does to achieve deliverance. The book of Exodus is full of the vocabulary of redemption. It tells of the God who “remembers” his promise to the Hebrew patriarchs (Ex 2:24; 6:5). God “comes down to deliver” the Israelites (3:8), or “save” them (14:30; 15:2), in order to “bring them” out of the land of Egypt (3:10-12). Redemption involves these aspects:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Lord is the author of redemption. In Exodus 6:1-8, as God answered Moses’ prayer to deliver his people, he used the pronoun “I” 18 times to emphasize that he was the one initiating the action. The Hebrew descendants of Abraham had known God primarily by the Hebrew name “El,” a common title in the ancient Near East for the supreme deity. But in Exodus, Israel learned that God is “Jehovah” or “Yahweh.” That is his personal name, a reminder that he is the God of the covenant who personally cares for his people’s welfare. In Exodus 3:14, God told Moses, “I am who I am” or “I will be who I will be.” Some scholars think that statement shows that the name Yahweh comes from the Hebrew verb “to be.” In any case, the concept of “name” in the Hebrew culture is synonymous with “character.” To know the name of God is to know something of his character. Israel knew God as the one who is eternally self-existent yet present with them wherever they would go, acting on their behalf (Ex 3:12; 33:14-16).<\/p>\n<li>2. The reason for redemption was God’s promise to the forefathers of the Israelites. When God heard the groaning of the people of Israel, he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob (Ex 2:24; cf. 6:5). In response to their need, he selected an agent of redemption, the unwilling Moses. Moses exhausted every possible excuse, but God would not take no for an answer. Moses is a vivid example of how God prepares, empowers, and sustains his chosen servants, using them to accomplish his purpose.<\/li>\n<li>3. The motive of redemption was God’s grace and love (Ex 15:13; 20:6; 34:6-7). The purpose of redemption was that Israel and the Egyptians might know God (6:7; 7:5; 8:10; 14:18). The Lord worked so that all who were involved—Moses, the Israelites, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians—would be sure that he alone is God. The Hebrew understanding of knowledge is not primarily intellectual but experience-oriented. The desired response to God’s action is not mere mental assent but also faith and obedience.<\/li>\n<li>4. Redemption is achieved in Exodus by miracles (4:21)—all natural processes controlled supernaturally by God. They are variously described as signs and wonders (7:3), great acts of judgment (6:6; 7:4), and “the finger of God” (8:19). Such miracles were not frivolous fireworks but purposeful works of God. Some of the miracles prove that Moses was sent by God. The miraculous plagues proved that God is supreme, for each of them was a direct challenge to one of the gods of Egypt: Osiris the river god, Yeqt the frog god, Ra (Re) the sun god, Athor the cattle god. The miracles in the wilderness proved that God fulfills all the needs of his people.<\/li>\n<li>5. The pharaoh was the villain—a picture of rebellious humanity confronted by God’s command (Ex 4:21-23). Ten times the pharaoh hardened his heart. Yet, in a sense, it was God who hardened the pharaoh’s heart, effecting the king’s decision to defy him.<\/li>\n<li>6. The Passover marked the purchase of redemption (Ex 12:23-27; 15:16). It was a clear example of salvation by substitution. When the death angel saw the blood on the doorposts and lintels, he passed by.<\/li>\n<li>7. The recipients of God’s redemption in Exodus were the Israelites. God took them as his own special people (6:7), and they were no longer free to do as they pleased. Even before the exodus he had claimed them, telling Pharaoh, “Israel is my first-born son, and I say to you, ‘Let my son go that he may serve me’ ” (4:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/li>\n<li>8. The demand of redemption was obedience. On the basis of his deliverance of the Israelites from bondage, God set forth the Ten Commandments (20:1-17) and the rest of the law for them to obey. The people, though quick to pledge their obedience (19:8; 24:3), were even quicker to disobey (32:8). Because the Lord is holy and wants his people to be holy and wholehearted in devotion (34:14), he must punish iniquity. But being compassionate, he also forgives. Throughout the centuries of Israel’s history, God pleaded with his people through the prophets to remember the exodus and repent (see Mi 6:3-4). The faithful responded in gratitude with Moses’ “song of redemption” (Ex 15; cf. Rv 15:3-4).<\/li>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<p>The book of Exodus can be divided into four sections, each describing one aspect of God’s dealings with the Israelites during the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Unveiling (Ex 1–6)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Exodus begins with the 70 descendants of Jacob who joined Joseph in Egypt for the duration of a famine that was afflicting their land (cf. Gn 46–50). After more than a century of prosperity for the Israelites in the land of Goshen, a new dynasty is established in Egypt whose leaders are not friendly toward Israel. In order to stem the rapid growth of the Hebrew people, the Egyptians force them to do hard labor, building storage cities for the pharaoh.<\/p>\n<p>A further command requires all Israelite male children to be killed at birth. The superintendents of the midwives do not comply, however, and God rewards them—not to show his approval of their lie but because they fear and obey God rather than the pharaoh. A new command calls for all male Israelite babies to be drowned in the Nile River. One special child, who escapes when Pharaoh’s daughter has his basket fished out of the Nile, is Moses. Ironically, Moses’ mother is paid by the princess to raise her own child, who grows up in the palace as the princess’s adopted son.<\/p>\n<p>As an adult, Moses chooses to identify with his Hebrew kin, a tribute to the early instruction given him by his godly parents (see Heb 11:24-26). He sets out to liberate Israel from the Egyptians, one man at a time. But he has to flee to Midian, at the eastern edge of the Sinai Peninsula or in Arabia beyond the northern top of the Gulf of Aqaba. Moses marries into the household of Jethro, also named Reuel. Reuel (“friend of God”) is probably the man’s personal name, and Jethro (“excellence”) his title. Because he is called a “priest of Midian” (Ex 2:16), some scholars have maintained a “Kenite hypothesis,” suggesting that Moses adopted the religion of his father-in-law and taught it to the Israelites. But the Bible states that Moses received his religion by a direct revelation from God. Jethro seems to believe only after he sees that God has rescued Israel from the Egyptians (18:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>While their future deliverer is in Midian, the Israelites continue to be oppressed and cry out to God in their misery (2:23-25). God responds by descending to his people. He came down to rescue Israel (3:8). He appears to Moses in a burning bush and identifies himself as the same God who promised the patriarchs a land “flowing with milk and honey” (3:17). Moses will lead the Israelites there, assisted by his brother, Aaron.<\/p>\n<p>Assured that God’s presence and miraculous signs will accompany him, Moses takes his wife Zipporah and his two sons and departs for Egypt. On the way, the Lord meets him and seeks to put him to death (4:24). That is probably the Hebrew way of saying that God strikes him with a mortal illness. Moses, who is going to deliver God’s people, has neglected the sign of the covenant in failing to circumcise one of his sons (Gn 17:14). Moses recovers after the rite is performed and continues on to Egypt, meeting Aaron at Mt Sinai. Their reception by the Israelites is more cordial than that of Pharaoh, who refuses to honor the God who sent Moses. Instead of releasing the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their God in the wilderness, he increases their burdens. The people complain to Moses, and Moses complains to God. God appears again to Moses (Ex 6), reassuring him that Israel will be delivered by divine power. God’s plan is not a failure—he is just beginning to put it into action.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Deliverance (Ex 7–19)<\/h5>\n<p>Chapters 7–12 record ten plagues with which God afflicts the Egyptians. Even before the first of them, the pharaoh has hardened his heart to defy God (7:13). There are three cycles of three plagues each:<\/p>\n\n<p> The first three plagues affect both the Egyptians and the Israelites; the Israelites are protected from the final six. The Egyptian magicians are able to duplicate the first two plagues, but when the third strikes, they admit, “This is the finger of God” (8:19). After the plague of flies covers the land, the pharaoh offers Moses the first of four compromises, but Moses refuses all of them (8:25-29; 10:8-11, 24-29). The first plagues are merely unpleasant, but the final ones are destructive and inflict much suffering. Since all of the plagues are common to that area, they themselves are not miraculous. The miracle is how the phenomena are multiplied and limited to the land of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The nine plagues serve to harden the pharaoh’s heart even more, so God prepares one final stroke. The death of every firstborn male, among both animals and humans, will be the fatal blow. God warns the Israelites to get ready to leave. To avert the death angel, they must put blood from an unblemished yearling male sheep or goat on their doorways. While they are eating the Passover meal, the death angel begins moving through the land of Egypt. In anguish the pharaoh drives the Israelites from the land; the slaves are free at last. Just as he has promised, the Lord goes before the children of Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night.<\/p>\n<p>But once again the pharaoh’s heart is hardened and he gives pursuit. God parts the waters of the sea with a great wind. The literal meaning of the name given that body of water is “sea of reeds.” It could refer to any shoreline where the water is sufficiently shallow for such plants to grow (see 1 Kgs 9:26, where the same term refers to the Gulf of Aqaba near Eloth). Whatever the location, there God hands the Egyptians their final defeat. The rescue is complete.<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the Israelites respond with renewed faith in the Lord and with a song of victory and praise (Ex 14:31–15:21). Soon, however, thanksgiving turns into grumbling because of bitter water (15:22-26), lack of meat and bread (16:1-15), and lack of water (17:1-7). In each situation God provides for their need. He also gives them victory over the Amalekites (vv 8-16). As the Israelites approach Mt Sinai, Moses’ family rejoins him, accompanied by Jethro. Jethro now confesses his faith in the God of the Israelites and shares in a fellowship meal with the leaders. He also assists Moses in reorganizing the judicial system, then returns to Midian (ch 18).<\/p>\n<p>The Israelites arrive at Mt Sinai, also called Horeb (3:1), and prepare to meet the Lord who has rescued them in fulfillment of his promise to Moses (v 12). The Lord establishes his covenant with Israel, taking them as his own possession, “a kingdom of priests, my holy nation.” They quickly respond, “We will certainly do everything the <span>Lord<\/span> asks of us” (19:5-8, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Instruction (Ex 20–24)<\/h5>\n<p>The God who redeems a people, who literally “buys them back from slavery,” has a right to make certain demands of them. The commandments God gives to Israel at Sinai are not burdensome requirements but protective guidelines for living as God’s people (20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Law (or Torah, meaning “instruction”) revealed at Sinai consists of three parts:<\/p>\n<p>1. The Ten Commandments (ch 20), addressing a person’s relationship to God and other people. Based on God’s nature (and therefore permanent), the Ten Commandments are unique in the history of the nations.<\/p>\n<li>2. The judgments (chs 21–23), social regulations for governing the people as a theocracy, similar in many ways to the law codes of Israel’s neighbors.<\/li>\n<li>3. Ordinances (chs 24–31) regulating religious ceremonies.<\/li>\n<p>All of the laws are given to Moses during the weeks he spends with God on the mountain.<\/p>\n<p>The Ten Commandments form the basis of all other laws in Israel (20:1-17). The first five deal with honoring the Lord, the second five with respecting one’s neighbor. The last commandment deals with one’s thoughts and intentions rather than with specific actions. It thus forms a safeguard against all sins not included in the first nine.<\/p>\n<p>The judgments recorded in chapters 21–23 deal with master-slave relationships (21:1-11), offenses punishable by death (vv 12-17), compensation for injury to persons or damage to property (21:18–22:15), various interpersonal relationships (22:16–23:9), and Sabbaths, feasts, and the offering of firstfruits (23:10-19). Many of the judgments would not take effect until Israel settled in the Promised Land. Accordingly, that section of the Law closes with a solemn warning against being rebellious and adopting pagan ways. It also contains a bright promise that God will drive out Israel’s enemies, protect his people from sickness, and grant them prosperity, if they obey the Lord’s commands (23:22).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 24 records a reaffirmation of the covenant between God and Israel, as Moses seals it with the blood of a sacrifice. In response, God appears to the leaders of the people, giving them a glimpse of his splendor. Then Moses ascends the mountain one more time to receive the stone tablets containing the commandments, as well as further instructions regarding the meeting tent (tabernacle), the priesthood, and worship.<\/p>\n<h5>God’s Presence with his People (Ex 25–40)<\/h5>\n<p>After the Lord redeemed the Israelites, he told Moses, “I will make you my own special people, and I will be your God. And you will know that I am the <span>Lord<\/span> your God who has rescued you from your slavery in Egypt” (6:7, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses had seen that wonderful promise fulfilled, yet one further step remained: “I want the people of Israel to build me a sacred residence where I can live among them” (25:8). God’s dwelling among his people is possible because God had descended to deliver the people and because they had pledged to meet his demands. God calls for a contribution from all whose hearts were willing to give, and he shows Moses a detailed pattern of the tabernacle and its furniture. Aaron and his sons are set apart to serve in the tent. Stipulations for the various offerings, including the Day of Atonement, are given. God tells Moses that he has chosen Bezalel and Oholiab to build the tabernacle and to craft its furnishings, having filled them with his Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>In the meantime the Israelites, who so recently promised total obedience, grow impatient as Moses lingers for 40 days on the mountain. They demand that Aaron make an idol for them. Under pressure, Aaron complies and forms a molten calf, a representation of a pagan deity (32:4).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord informs Moses of the people’s idolatry, revelry, and immorality and says that he is angry enough to destroy all of them and start again with Moses’ offspring. Moses pleads for Israel until the Lord relents, then descends from the mountain to punish the people. Moses pleads again for forgiveness for Israel, and God in mercy pardons their terrible sin (34:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Once more God offers to make a covenant with the people (34:10). Moses spends another 40 days with the Lord, writing the commandments on tablets to replace those smashed when he saw the golden calf. When he returns to the people, his face shines from being in God’s presence, and he must keep it veiled.<\/p>\n<p>Now that Israel has been restored to God’s favor, the construction of the tabernacle can begin. The contributions are so generous that Moses must restrain the people from bringing any more. Finally, all is ready. Moses examines the tabernacle, and it is erected on the first day of the first month, nearly a year after the first Passover. The priests are consecrated, the lamps are lit, and the first burnt sacrifice is offered. A cloud descends, filling the tabernacle with the glory of the Lord. God dwells among his people, the goal of redemption has been attained, and the drama of the book of Exodus has come to an end.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Chronology of the Bible (Old Testament); Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Israel, History of; Moses; Plagues upon Egypt; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","summary_en":"EXODUS, Book of Second book of the Bible, containing the story of God’s liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt. Few books of the OT are as important historically and theologically as the book of Exodus. Historically, the exodus event was the birth of Israel as a nation. At Mt Sinai a group of tribes who were descendants of Abraham became a nation ruled by God. The book of Exodus explains how the Israelites were able to resettle the land God had promised to Abraham and gives ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13499,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Genesis","title_en":"Book of Genesis","content_ro":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GENESIS, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>First book of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Name<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Structure<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Name\">Name<\/p>\n<p>The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">bere’shith<\/span><em>,<\/em> “in the beginning.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Genesis is closely related to the authorship of the entire Pentateuch (lit. “five-volumed,” the first five books of the Bible, which in Hebrew are called the Torah). It is clear that the Bible regards the human author of these books as Moses. On several occasions the Lord commanded Moses to write down various things: “in a book” (Ex 17:14) “write these words” (34:27). The Pentateuch reports that “Moses wrote all the words of the <span>Lord<\/span>” (24:4); he wrote the itinerary of the exodus wanderings (Nm 33:2); “Moses wrote this law” (Dt 31:9). (Here it is not certain that all five books are meant, but it must refer to at least the greater part of Deuteronomy.) In Exodus 24:7 it is said that Moses read the Book of the Covenant, which he must have just completed.<\/p>\n<p>The rest of the OT bears witness to the writing of the Pentateuch by Moses. David referred to “the law of Moses” (1 Kgs 2:3). In the time of Josiah, there was found in the temple the “Book of the Law of the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . given through Moses” (2 Chr 34:14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Day by day Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of God” (Neh 8:18, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, Jesus refers to “the book of Moses” (Mk 12:26; Lk 20:37) and otherwise mentions the commands or statements of Moses (Mt 8:4; 19:8; Mk 7:10; cf. Lk 16:31; 24:44). The Jews also quoted from the Torah as coming from Moses, and Jesus did not contradict them.<\/p>\n<p>Of Genesis in particular, it may be said that Moses had the opportunity and ability to write the book. He could have written it during his years in Egypt or while exiled with the Kenites. As the recognized leader of the Israelites, he would have had access to, or perhaps even custody of, the records that Jacob brought from Canaan. He was “instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22) and probably could have written in several languages and in several scripts (hieroglyphic, cuneiform, Old Hebrew). Although Moses was admirably fitted for the task of writing, one must remember that he was not putting together a human composition but was writing under the inspiration of God (2 Pt 1:21). We may with confidence conclude that Moses was the human author of Genesis.<\/p>\n<p>The liberal view of the authorship of Genesis is that the book is an editorial composite—a view first put forward by a French physician, Jean Astruc, who suggested that the different names for God indicated different documents or sources for the writing of the book. The German higher critics expanded the view of the use of documents in the writing of Genesis and developed it into the Graf-Wellhausen-Kuenen, or Documentary, Hypothesis, which may also be called the JEDP theory of the authorship of the book. This view holds that there were four basic documents: (1) J, which uses the name YHWH (Jehovah or Yahweh) for God, dates from about the ninth century <span>BC<\/span> and comes from Judah; (2) E uses the name Elohim, dates from the eighth century, and comes from the northern kingdom; (3) D is Deuteronomy and is supposed to come from the time of Josiah, about 621 <span>BC<\/span>; and (4) P is the priestly element, which deals with matters of the priesthood and ritual, dating to the fifth century <span>BC<\/span> or later. Some may date portions of Genesis as late as the Hellenistic period. According to this theory, the various documents were blended together by editors, so that there was a JE, JED, and so on.<\/p>\n<p>The science of archaeology discredited many of the extreme postulations of these critics, and the work of W. F. Albright and his followers did much to restore confidence in the historicity of Genesis. Within the last several decades, the patriarchal narratives and the account of Joseph have again come under strong attack, but these views are extreme, and much of the evidence adduced by Albright and earlier scholars like R. D. Wilson, W. H. Green, and others still has validity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The date of the book is also a matter of debate. Even among those who accept Mosaic authorship there is debate as to when Moses lived. Based on the biblical data, Moses should have lived in the 15th century <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Jgs 11:26; 1 Kgs 6:1), but many scholars incline toward a 13th-century date. As outlined above, the liberal view of the date of Genesis would be from the ninth to the fifth centuries <span>BC<\/span>, with the final editing coming around the fifth century or perhaps even later.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>Genesis sketches the origin of many things: the universe, the earth, plants, animals, and mankind. It gives the beginnings of human institutions, professions, and crafts. It describes the origin of sin and death, and illustrates the insidious working of Satan in human life. Above all, Genesis relates the beginning of the history of redemption with the announcement of a Redeemer who was to come (Gn 3:15). It names the early progenitors in the lineage of the Messiah and the beginning of the Hebrew people through whom the Bible and the Savior came. Genesis also gives a selective history of people and events as viewed from the perspective of the purposes of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Structure\">Structure<\/p>\n<p>The book is divided into 11 parts of uneven length, each set off by the expression “these are the generations [descendants, history] of” (2:4; 5:1; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; 25:12, 19; 36:1; 37:2). Only three times does the formula coincide with the first verse of a chapter. Usually called a heading or superscription, the expression serves as a kind of link between what precedes and what follows.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Creation (1:1–2:25)<\/h5>\n<p>These two chapters have been a scientific-theological battleground for many years, as researchers and students have tried to probe the origins of the universe and of life. Much of the evidence is not subject to scientific scrutiny, for science by definition requires that the evidence must be reproducible by experiment.<\/p>\n<p>The statement of Genesis 1:1 remains the grandest, most precise, and most accurate statement of origins: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He did this <em>ex nihilo<\/em> (“out of nothing”) by his word (Heb 11:3); he spoke the word of command and it was done (Gn 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20; Ps 33:6, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The date of the beginning is unknown. Uniformitarian cosmogonists (students of the origins of the universe who believe that natural events have always followed a uniform pattern; cf. 2 Pt 3:3-7) have speculated that the beginning of the universe was billions of years ago. But some creationists posit a world thousands of years old.<\/p>\n<p>To accommodate geological ages and the existence of extinct animals, some interpreters have proposed a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, with Genesis 1:2–2:3 representing a second or new creation. But this is conjecture. So is the idea that each day represents a geological age.<\/p>\n<p>As the text stands, there is a correlation between the first three days and the second three days. Day one saw the creation of light; day four, the light bearers. Day two was the time of the creation of the firmament (better, “expanse”), which divided the waters; day five, birds and swarming water creatures. On day three, God made the dry land and plants; on day six he created the land animals and man. He made man in the image of God (Gn 1:26), “a little less than God” (Ps 8:5), and gave him dominion over the earth. He made everything “according to their kinds,” so that each kind is distinct and unique. The perfection of his work is affirmed in that “God saw that it was good” (Gn 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21; “very good,” v 31). The seventh day was a time of cessation from the activity of creating and served as a type for mankind’s day of rest (2:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Critical scholarship eyes 2:4-25 as a doublet in conflict with Genesis 1:1–2:3. To conservative scholars, the second chapter is the same account from a different perspective. Chapter 1 gives the Creation from the standpoint of sequence; chapter 2 shows it in view of the centrality of mankind in God’s creative work.<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 2 gives details of the creation of man of “dust from the ground” (v 7) and woman from a rib of the man (vv 21-22). She was created to be “a companion who will help him” (vv 18-20). They were created as mature adults, with the gift of speech and with great intelligence. Adam had imagination and vocabulary sufficient for naming all of the animal species (v 19).<\/p>\n<p>The location of the Garden of Eden is given (vv 10-14). Two of the four rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, can be identified with certainty. So man lived in this beautiful garden in the bliss of innocence.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Humankind from Eden to Babel (3:1–11:26)<\/h5>\n<h6>The Fall<\/h6>\n<p>The loss of Eden and the break in fellowship with God is the saddest chapter in human history. The serpent, the devil, approached Eve with the same philosophy he always uses: doubt of God’s word (Gn 3:1), denial of death (v 4), and the suggestion of equality with God (v 5). He gained access to her will by deceiving her with the promise that the fruit would make her as wise as God is (Gn 3:5; cf. 1 Jn 2:16). Eve was deceived, but when she offered the fruit to Adam, he took it willingly, knowing what he was doing (Gn 3:6; cf. 1 Tm 2:14). Later, he tried to blame God for giving him the wife who gave him the fruit (Gn 3:12). Fellowship with God was broken (v 8), yet God came seeking Adam and found him.<\/p>\n<p>With sin came judgment, and the Lord pronounced righteous judgment on the serpent, the woman, and the man. The earth was also “subjected to frustration” and now groans as it awaits renewal (Rom 8:21-22). God gave hope to man and a promise of a Redeemer (Gn 3:15), who was to bruise the serpent’s head. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden, and it was made inaccessible to them.<\/p>\n<p>The impatience of humankind is shown in Eve’s expectation that her son Cain was the promised Deliverer. Instead, he developed a wrong-hearted attitude toward God and became so jealous of his younger brother that he murdered him. Apprehended by God and confronted with his crime, Cain showed only self-pity and went east from Eden, where he built a city (4:1-16). Chapter 4 closes with another contrast: the brazen Lamech, who called for vengeance, while others began to call upon the name of the Lord.<\/p>\n<h6>The Generations of Adam<\/h6>\n<p>This genealogical table (5:1-32) brings humankind to the time of Noah and the Flood. The longevity of the antediluvian patriarchs seems very striking to us, but one must remember that the earth had not yet been subjected to pollution and that the effects of sin on the human race were still nominal. The refrain “and he died” reminds us of man’s mortality. For Enoch, however, there was something better: “He enjoyed a close relationship with God throughout his life. Then, suddenly, he disappeared because God took him” (5:24, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h6>The Flood<\/h6>\n<p>With increased population came an eruption of sin (6:1-5). As men multiplied, so did their corruption. The universal condemnation of verse 5 shows a world ripe for judgment. Noah, however, “found favor with the <span>Lord<\/span>,” for he was a righteous and blameless man who walked with God (6:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord planned to annihilate the human race, but he determined to save Noah and his family. Intending to flood the earth, God instructed Noah to build an ark. Noah was directed to take animals aboard the ark, two by two, male and female, for the preservation of each species. When all was in readiness, the Flood came: “the underground waters burst forth on the earth, and the rain fell in mighty torrents from the sky” (7:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). It rained for 40 days and 40 nights. The highest mountains were covered, and life outside the ark perished. “But God remembered Noah” and sent a wind to evaporate the waters (8:1). Eventually the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (v 4). Noah made a sacrifice to the Lord, and the Lord determined that he would never again bring such destruction upon the earth.<\/p>\n<p>The Flood is another of God’s acts that has been much debated. Many have argued for a local flood, which affected only part of Mesopotamia. Archaeologists have pointed to various flood strata in the excavation of Mesopotamian city-mounds as evidence for the account of the flood and have cited the various flood stories from that area as the source of the Genesis record. The epic of Gilgamesh gives an interesting tale of this hero, who went on a mission to visit Utnapishtim, the cuneiform Noah, in quest of eternal life. The flood story told by Utnapishtim has many parallels to Genesis, but there are greater contrasts, which demonstrate that the Bible preserves the true account.<\/p>\n<p>Both the Genesis account and the references to it in the NT (cf. 2 Pt 3:6) favor the view that the deluge was not a minor episode in the Tigris-Euphrates area but was an unprecedented worldwide catastrophe. Christian geologists affirm that the Flood had far-reaching effects on the earth itself. Flood stories are almost universally known, lending support to the conclusion that the Flood covered the whole earth. Following the Flood, God blessed Noah and his sons, Ham, Shem, and Japheth. God made a covenant with Noah, promising that he would never again send a worldwide flood. As a sign of this, he established the rainbow.<\/p>\n<p>Noah was the first tiller of the soil, and he planted a vineyard (9:20). Noah became drunk from wine he made and lay uncovered in his tent. Ham saw him and reported this to his brothers, who discreetly covered him. Ham and his son Canaan were cursed; Shem and Japheth were blessed.<\/p>\n<h6>The History of the Nations<\/h6>\n<p>“This is the history of the families of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the three sons of Noah. Many children were born to them after the Flood” (10:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). This chapter lists the descendants of Noah’s three sons, in the order of Japheth (vv 2-5), Ham (vv 6-20), and Shem (vv 21-31). Many of the names of their descendants are preserved in tribes and nations of the world.<\/p>\n<h6>The Tower of Babel<\/h6>\n<p>The building of the Tower of Babel (“Gate of God”) illustrates man’s perversity and his tendency to want independence from God. The desire of man to displace God follows the fateful example of Lucifer and is a basic tenet of many cults. God thwarted the designs of the builders of Babel by confusing their languages, so that the project came to a halt (11:1-9). The site of this tower is not known with certainty. Some associate it with Birs Nimrud, not far from the ruins of the city of Babylon. Genesis 11:10-25 picks up the line of Shem and carries it down to Terah, the father of Abram.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Abraham (11:27–25:10) and Isaac (21:1–28:5)<\/h5>\n<p>Abram came from Ur of the Chaldees, a prosperous city. The city had an imposing ziggurat (temple-tower), with many temples, storehouses, and residences. Abram and Sarai, his half sister and wife, went with his father to Haran in Syria, which like Ur was a center of the worship of the moon god, Sin (or Annar).<\/p>\n<h6>Abram’s Call<\/h6>\n<p>The call of God came to Abram directing him to leave his relatives and move to a land that the Lord would show him (12:1; cf. Acts 7:2-3). Abram obeyed. At the age of 75, he, Sarai, and his nephew Lot left Haran and went to Shechem, where the Lord appeared to him and promised that land to his descendants.<\/p>\n<p>Famine drove Abram down to Egypt (Gn 12:10-20). Because of Sarai’s beauty, he feared that someone might kill him to get her, so he passed her off as his sister. She was taken into the pharaoh’s harem. When the Lord plagued Pharaoh because of this, Abram’s lie was discovered and Sarai was returned to him.<\/p>\n<h6>Abram and Lot<\/h6>\n<p>Abram and Lot returned to Canaan, where strife broke out between Abram’s herdsmen and those of Lot. Abram suggested that they should separate, and he gave Lot the choice of territory. Lot chose the well-watered Jordan Valley and the cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah (ch 13).<\/p>\n<h6>The Invasion of the Four Kings from the East<\/h6>\n<p>The four kings who invaded along the King’s Highway in Transjordan cannot be identified with certainty. Those kings were successful in their attack against the five cities of the plain, and they moved off with much booty and many captives, including Lot. Abram took 318 retainers, born in his household, and set off after them. By surprise attack, Abram recovered both Lot and the loot. On his return he was met by Melchizedek, king of Jerusalem, to whom Abram paid tithes (ch 14).<\/p>\n<h6>The Covenant<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord promised Abram a son as heir, and in an impressive nighttime ceremony, God made a covenant with Abram and promised him the land from the River of Egypt (Wadi el Arish) to the Euphrates (ch 15). Because of her own barrenness, Sarai gave her Egyptian maid, Hagar, to Abram. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, the progenitor of the Arab peoples. When trouble arose between the women, Sarai sent Hagar away, which was her right according to Near Eastern customs (as illustrated by the Nuzi tablets). God showed mercy to Hagar and promised that she would have a great posterity (ch 16).<\/p>\n<p>God repeated his promise to Abram concerning his descendants and changed the names of Abram (“exalted father”) and Sarai to Abraham (“father of many”) and Sarah (“princess”). A covenant sign of circumcision was given to Abraham (ch 17). This operation had already been practiced among the Egyptians for several centuries.<\/p>\n<h6>The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain<\/h6>\n<p>The Lord and two angels appeared to Abraham and announced the birth of the promised heir within a year, as well as proclaimed the impending destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, concerning which Abraham bargained with God (18:22-33). Lot and his immediate family were rescued from Sodom, and the cities were destroyed by God with brimstone and fire (19:24-25). Lot’s two daughters, wishing to preserve their family line, got their father drunk and had sexual relations with him. Moab and Ammon, enemies of Israel in later times, were the result.<\/p>\n<p>In Genesis 20:1-18, Abraham again represented Sarah as his sister and got into trouble with Abimelech, king of Gerar.<\/p>\n<h6>Isaac<\/h6>\n<p>When Isaac was born (21:1-3), trouble again broke out between Sarah and Hagar. Hagar was driven out a second time, and once more was befriended by the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>A disagreement arose between Abraham and Abimelech concerning a well, but they made a covenant of peace at Beersheba (21:25-34).<\/p>\n<p>God tested Abraham’s faith by asking him to sacrifice Isaac on Mt Moriah, which probably is the same site David later bought from Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sm 24:16-25), the place where the temple was to stand. As Abraham was about to use the knife, God called to him and showed him a ram caught in a thicket. Isaac was freed and the animal was sacrificed in his stead.<\/p>\n<p>Sarah died at Hebron, and Abraham purchased the cave of Machpelah as a burial place from Ephron the Hittite (ch 23), in a transaction typical of Near Eastern business dealings. To find a wife for Isaac, Abraham sent his servant Eliezer back to the area of Haran, and the Lord directed Eliezer to Rebekah (ch 24).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 25 records the marriage of Abraham to Keturah, who bore him a number of children. Abraham died at the age of 175 years and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by his two sons, Isaac and Ishmael.<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Jacob and Esau (25:19–37:1)<\/h5>\n<p>Rebekah gave birth to twin sons, Esau and Jacob. When the boys were grown, Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a meal of red pottage (25:27-34).<\/p>\n<p>When famine came to the land, Isaac went to Gerar, as his father had done (ch 20), and repeated his father’s lie by calling his wife his sister (26:1-11). Trouble arose with the Philistines over wells, but Isaac was a peaceable man and preferred digging new wells rather than fighting over old ones (vv 17-33).<\/p>\n<p>In Isaac’s old age, when his sight had failed, Rebekah connived with Jacob to trick Isaac into giving to Jacob the blessing of the firstborn, which was rightfully Esau’s. This oral blessing had legal validity and was irrevocable, according to the ancient Nuzi tablets. Fearing for Jacob’s life at the hands of Esau, Rebekah arranged to send Jacob to Haran to find a wife from among her own people. At Bethel, God appeared to Jacob in a dream of a ladder leading up to heaven; God renewed with Jacob the promise made to Abraham and Isaac (28:10-22).<\/p>\n<p>Jacob reached Haran, found his uncle Laban, and was employed by him (ch 29). His wages for seven years of labor were to be Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel, as his wife. But Laban substituted Leah, so that Jacob had to work another seven years for Rachel. The Lord prospered Jacob, but he continually had difficulties with Laban. The Lord directed Jacob back to Canaan (31:3), so he left secretly with his wives, children, and property. Laban pursued them because his household gods were missing (possession of these “gods” made the holder heir to the owner’s estate, according to Nuzi custom). Rachel had taken them but successfully concealed them from her father, and Laban went back to Haran.<\/p>\n<p>Fearing a meeting with Esau as they passed through Edom, Jacob sent gifts to his brother and divided his own party into two camps for security. On this return journey, Jacob had an unexpected wrestling bout with the Angel of the Lord, and he was left with a limp and a new name, Israel (ch 32).<\/p>\n<p>The meeting with Esau was friendly, and Jacob went on to Shechem (ch 33), where his sons killed the male Shechemites because of the rape of their sister Dinah (ch 34). God told Jacob to go to Bethel and build an altar to the Lord. All idols of foreign gods were buried (35:1-4). At Bethel, God reaffirmed his promise of a posterity and the land (vv 9-15). Rachel died on the way to Bethlehem, while giving birth to Benjamin, Jacob’s 12th and last son. Isaac died at Hebron at age 180 and was buried in the cave of Machpelah by Esau and Jacob.<\/p>\n<p>Genesis 36 records “the generations of Esau” (v 1). Here Esau is also named Edom (“Red”; cf. 25:30).<\/p>\n<h5>The History of Joseph (37:2–50:26)<\/h5>\n<p>Joseph was Jacob’s favorite son and thus incurred the jealousy of his brothers. This was heightened by Joseph’s dreams of lordship over them. Their resentment of Joseph came to a climax when Jacob gave Joseph a beautiful coat. The brothers determined to kill Joseph, but they compromised by selling him to a caravan of merchants, who took him to Egypt and sold him as a slave to Potiphar, an Egyptian captain of the guard (37:36; 39:1).<\/p>\n<p>Chapter 38 relates a historic case of levirate marriage. Judah failed to give his widowed daughter-in-law to his third son. She deceived him into fathering twin sons and forced him to acknowledge his faults. The elder son, Perez, is named in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Lk 3:33).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord blessed Joseph, who soon was put in charge of Potiphar’s household (Gn 39). The young man attracted the attention of Potiphar’s wife, who, after many attempts to seduce him, at last accused him of attempted rape. Sentenced on this charge, Joseph met with favor in prison, where he had opportunity to interpret dreams for two of the pharaoh’s servants (ch 40). When the king had dreams that his magicians and wise men could not interpret, Joseph was summoned from jail. Joseph told Pharaoh that the dreams meant seven years of plenty, followed by seven years of famine. Joseph was then exalted to the office of vizier, or prime minister, second only to the king, and put in charge of the administration of the land (41:37-44).<\/p>\n<p>When the famine came to Palestine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt to purchase grain. Joseph recognized his brothers but did not reveal his identity to them. Joseph put them to the test by accusing them of being spies (42:9), by keeping one of the brothers (Simeon) hostage (v 19), and by demanding that if they came to Egypt again, they must bring their youngest brother with them (42:20; 43:3). The famine became so severe in Canaan (43:1) that Jacob at last allowed Benjamin to go with his brothers to Egypt. The brothers were again set up by Joseph, who had his silver cup put into Benjamin’s grain sack and then had him apprehended as a thief (ch 44).<\/p>\n<p>At this point Joseph revealed his identity to his brothers (45:4-15) and there was much rejoicing. Joseph pointed out that it was God who had sent him to Egypt (vv 7-8), in order to preserve the lives of all the family. Jacob was then sent for (46:1), and Joseph met him in the land of Goshen (46:28-29). The Israelites were assigned land in the region of Goshen, where they prospered (47:27).<\/p>\n<p>In Jacob’s final illness, Joseph brought his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, to his father for his blessing. Jacob gave the primary blessing to the second-born, Ephraim (48:13-20). Jacob blessed each of his own sons and then died at the age of at least 130 years. Joseph arranged for Jacob’s body to be prepared for burial according to Egyptian custom (50:2-3). After the burial of their father in the cave of Machpelah at Hebron, Joseph’s brothers worried about vengeance, but Joseph declared, “As far as I am concerned, God turned into good what you meant for evil. He brought me to the high position I have today so I could save the lives of many people” (v 20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Joseph died at age 110 with the prophetic request that when the Israelites went up from Egypt they would take his bones with them (50:25; cf. Ex 13:19; Jos 24:32).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Abraham; Adam (Person); Covenant; Creation; Eve; Fall of Man; Flood, The; Isaac; Jacob #1; Joseph #1; Nations; Noah #1; Patriarchs, Period of the.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","summary_en":"GENESIS, Book of First book of the Bible. Preview • Name • Author • Date • Purpose • Structure • Content Name The name Genesis comes into English as a transliteration of the Greek word meaning “origin” or “beginning.” This name was given to the book in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Septuagint. Genesis reflects both the content of the book and the Hebrew name for it, which is taken from its first word, bere’shith, “in the beginning.” Author The authorship of Gene...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26400,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Moses","title_en":"Moses","content_ro":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MOSES<\/h3>\n<p>Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:17; Ps 18:16). If, however, it is an Egyptian name given him by the daughter of Pharaoh who found him, it is more likely from an Egyptian word for “son” (also found as part of many well-known Egyptian names such as Ahmose, Thutmose, and Ramses). No one else in the OT bears this name.<\/p>\n<p>Without question, the greatest figure in the OT (mentioned by name 767 times), his influence also extends to the pages of the NT (where he is mentioned 79 times). The first 40 years of his life were spent in the household of Pharaoh (Acts 7:23), where he was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. The next 40 years he spent in Midian as a fugitive from the wrath of Pharaoh, after killing an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. His last 40 years were devoted to leading the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt to the land God had promised to Abraham and his descendants (Gn 12:1-3). He died at the age of 120 after leading the Israelites successfully through 40 years of wandering in the wilderness to the very edge of the Promised Land on the east side of the Jordan River (Dt 34:7). He is one of the great figures in all of history, a man who took a group of slaves and, under inconceivably difficult circumstances, molded them into a nation that has influenced and altered the entire course of history.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<p>• The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<p>• The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<p>• Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The only source of information for the life of Moses is the Bible. Archaeology confirms the credibility of the events associated with Moses, but it has never provided any specific confirmation of his existence or work. His story begins with the arrival in Egypt of Jacob, his sons, and their families during a time of famine in Canaan. Invited by Joseph and welcomed by Pharaoh, the family settled down in northeast Egypt in an area known as Goshen, where they remained for 430 years (Ex 12:40). With the passing of time, their numbers grew rapidly, so that the land was filled with them (1:7). A new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph. The biblical account does not give the name of this pharaoh, and there has never been agreement as to his identity. He has most frequently been identified as Thutmose III (1504–1451 <span>BC<\/span>), Seti I (1304–1290 <span>BC<\/span>), or Ramses II (1290–1224 <span>BC<\/span>). Out of fear that their growing numbers might become a threat to the security of his nation, Pharaoh determined to take measures to reduce their number. He put them to work building the store cities of Pithom and Rameses, but the severity of the work did not diminish them. He next tried to enlist the cooperation of the midwives to destroy the male babies, but they would not carry out his orders. He then ordered his own people to drown the male infants in the Nile River. Against the background of this first-known Jewish persecution, the baby Moses was born.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFirst40YearsInEgypt\">The First 40 Years—In Egypt<\/p>\n<h5>Birth and Early Life<\/h5>\n<p>A man of the family of Levi named Amram married his father’s sister Jochebed (Ex 6:20; cf. 2:1). Their first son, Aaron, three years older than Moses, was born before the command to drown the Hebrew babies was given, as there is no indication that his life was in danger. However, the cruel order was in force when Moses was born, and after three months, when his mother could no longer hide him, she took a basket made of bulrushes and daubed it with bitumen and pitch. She put the baby into the basket and placed it among the reeds along the banks of the river. An older sister, Miriam, stayed near the river to see what would happen. Soon the daughter of Pharaoh (identified by Josephus as Thermuthis and by others as Hatshepsut, but whose actual identity cannot be determined) came to the river to bathe, as was her custom. She discovered the baby, recognized it as one of the Hebrew children, and determined that she would raise the child as her own. Miriam emerged from her hiding place and offered to secure a Hebrew woman to nurse the child, an arrangement that was agreeable to the princess. Miriam took the baby to his own mother, who kept him for perhaps two or three years (cf. 1 Sm 1:19-24). Nothing is recorded of those formative years. Whether his mother continued seeing him during his later childhood and young manhood or revealed his true identity to him or taught him the Hebrew faith are matters of speculation. Moses was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, as would befit a member of the royal household, and he became mighty in his words and deeds (Acts 7:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Identification with His Own People<\/h5>\n<p>Just when Moses became aware that he was a Hebrew rather than Egyptian cannot be known, but it is clear that he knew it by the time he was 40 years old. One day he went out to visit his people and to observe their treatment, for the cruel measures taken against them by Pharaoh at the time of Moses’ birth had not been lifted. Seeing an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, Moses in great anger killed the Egyptian and buried him. He thought the deed had gone unnoticed until the next day when he encountered two Hebrews fighting with each other. When he tried to act as peacemaker, they both turned on him and accused him of murder: “Who made you a prince and a judge over us? Do you mean to kill me, as you killed the Egyptian?” (Ex 2:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). Acts 7:25 adds: “He supposed that his brethren understood that God was giving them deliverance by his hand” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Aware that being a member of Pharaoh’s household would not exempt him from punishment now that the deed was known, Moses fled for his life to the land of Midian.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheSecond40YearsInMidian\">The Second 40 Years—In Midian<\/p>\n<h5>Marriage into the Family of Jethro<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after arriving in Midian, Moses sat down by a well, where he observed the seven daughters of the priest of Midian who had come to the well to draw water for their father’s flock. Shepherds came and drove them away, but Moses intervened and helped them water their animals. When Jethro (Ex 3:1; also called Reuel, 2:18; Hobab, Nm 10:29) learned what had happened, he invited Moses to stay with his family and gave him Zipporah as his wife. (There is some disagreement among scholars regarding the identity of Hobab in Numbers 10:29; some think he was Moses’ father-in-law, while others maintain that Hobab was Moses’ brother-in-law. <em>See also<\/em> Hobab). Two children, Gershom (Ex 2:22) and Eliezer (18:4), were born to Moses and Zipporah during the years in Midian. Forty years passed, and Moses’ thoughts about his former life in Egypt must have faded into the past. He could not have foreseen that God would soon thrust him back into the midst of the court in Egypt, where he would confront the son of the now-dead pharaoh with the demand to release the Hebrew people from the bondage they had endured for so many years. God had not forgotten his people and was now ready to deliver them.<\/p>\n<h5>Encounter with God at the Burning Bush<\/h5>\n<p>One day, while Moses was taking care of the flocks of his father-in-law, he led them to Mt Horeb (known also as Sinai), where God appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush that burned but was not consumed. Moses approached to observe the strange sight more closely and heard God speak to him out of the bush, “Moses, Moses!” Moses replied, “Here am I.” Before he could come any nearer to the bush, God said, “Do not come near; put off your shoes from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:4-5, <span>rsv<\/span>). He further identified himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He assured Moses that he was aware of the cruel afflictions of his people and had heard their cries. Then he told of his plan to send Moses to Egypt to deliver his people from their bondage.<\/p>\n<p>Faced with a challenge that seemed beyond his capabilities, the aged Moses began making excuses for not accepting the task. God assured Moses that he would be with him (Ex 3:11-12). To his excuse that he would not be able to give an answer if the people asked him the name of the God he represented, God revealed his name in the cryptic statement, “ ‘<span>I Am the One Who Always Is<\/span>’ . . . Just tell them, ‘I <span>Am<\/span> has sent me to you’ ” (vv 13-14, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many interpretations have been proposed for the name. Whatever else it means, it undoubtedly suggests the self-existence and all-sufficiency of God. Moses then argued that the people would not believe him when he told them that God had sent him to deliver them from Egypt. In response God gave him three signs: When he cast his shepherd’s rod to the ground, it became a serpent. When he put his hand to his bosom, it became leprous. He was also told that when he would pour water from the Nile on the ground, it would become blood (Ex 4:1-9). Even armed with these powerful evidences of the presence of God with him, Moses raised still another objection, “O Lord, I’m just not a good speaker. I never have been, and I’m not now, even after you have spoken to me. I’m clumsy with words” (v 10, <span>nlt<\/span>). God told him that he would teach him what to say, but despite such assurance, Moses asked God to send someone else. In anger mingled with compassion, God made Moses’ brother, Aaron, the spokesman, but said his instructions would still be given directly to Moses.<\/p>\n<h5>Return to Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>Moses took his wife and sons and set out for Egypt, telling his father-in-law only that he wanted to go back to Egypt to visit his kinsmen there (Ex 4:18). The biblical account says he put his wife and sons on the same donkey to journey back to Egypt (v 20). The fact that all three rode the same animal indicates that both children were quite young and had not been born in the early years of Moses’ marriage. At a lodging place along the way a strange thing happened. The Lord met him and sought to kill him (v 24), apparently because Moses had failed to circumcise the baby before leaving Midian. When Zipporah realized that Moses’ life was in danger, she performed the rite herself and said to her husband, “What a blood-smeared bridegroom you are to me!” (v 25, <span>nlt<\/span>). Whatever else may have been involved in this unusual encounter with God, it was a solemn reminder that the one who was to be the leader of the covenant people must not himself neglect any part of the covenant (Gn 17:10-14).<\/p>\n<p>God told Aaron (who was still in Egypt) to go to the mountain where Moses had encountered God at the burning bush and meet his brother there. Moses told Aaron everything that had happened, and together they went to Egypt, gathered the elders together, and informed them of these matters. When Moses and Aaron performed the signs in the presence of the people, they believed these leaders had been sent by God to deliver them from their affliction (Ex 4:30-31).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheThird40YearsFromEgypttoCanaan\">The Third 40 Years—From Egypt to Canaan<\/p>\n<h5>The Encounter with Pharaoh<\/h5>\n<p>Soon after his return to Egypt, Moses, accompanied by Aaron, went to Pharaoh and repeated the demands of the Lord, “Let my people go, for they must go out into the wilderness to hold a religious festival in my honor” (Ex 5:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). Pharaoh rejected the demand with the observation that he had never heard of this God of Moses. When one realizes that Egyptian kings considered themselves to be gods, the affront to Pharaoh becomes even more acute. Not only did he reject Moses’ demands, but he intensified the burdens of the Hebrews. Their work had up until then required them to make brick using straw provided for them, but now Pharaoh said they would have to gather their own straw and still produce the same number of bricks. The Hebrews turned in anguish and anger to Moses and blamed him for making them offensive in the sight of Pharaoh. Even Moses could not understand the turn of events and complained bitterly to God. God reassured Moses that he would deliver the Hebrews from their bondage, and moreover, he would bring them into the land he had promised Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He then instructed Moses to return to Pharaoh and repeat the demand to release the Hebrews upon threat of severe reprisal if the demand were ignored.<\/p>\n<p>Ushered again into Pharaoh’s presence, Moses repeated his request for release of the Israelites. He attempted to impress Pharaoh by turning his rod into a serpent, but the Egyptian wise men, through their secret arts, were able to duplicate the miracle, so Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened and he would not listen to Moses. In rapid succession Moses brought nine plagues upon the land of Egypt to show the omnipotence of God to force the compliance of Pharaoh. These included a plague in which the water of the Nile turned to blood, a plague of frogs, one of gnats, then of flies, a plague on the livestock, boils on the people, plagues of hail, locusts, and complete darkness. During the plagues of the frogs, flies, hail, locusts, and darkness, Pharaoh was distraught and would temporarily relent and agree to Moses’ demands, but as soon as the plague was lifted, his heart hardened and he would retract his promise. The outcome of the first nine plagues was terrible devastation of the land of Egypt, but the Israelites were not released. There was yet one more plague in store, the most terrible of all.<\/p>\n<h5>The First Passover<\/h5>\n<p>God told Moses that there remained one more plague in store for the Egyptians: “All the firstborn sons will die in every family in Egypt, from the oldest son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the oldest son of his lowliest slave. Even the firstborn of the animals will die” (Ex 11:5, <span>nlt<\/span>). Furthermore, he assured Moses that the plague would not touch a single household of the Hebrews, “Then you will know that the <span>Lord<\/span> makes a distinction between the Egyptians and the Israelites” (v 7, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>God instructed the people through Moses and Aaron to make their preparations for leaving the land in haste. They were to go to the Egyptians and ask them for their jewels of silver and gold (Ex 11:2-3), a request to which the Egyptians agreed, perhaps out of fear of the Hebrews and in the belief that the gifts would bring about an end of the terrors that had struck the land. The Hebrews were also instructed to prepare a lamb for each family—small families could share—for the last meal to be eaten in the land of Egypt (a rite that became the pattern for the Jewish observance of the Passover for many centuries). Blood of the lamb was to be put on the doorposts and lintels of the houses in which the Passover meal was being eaten that night. The Hebrews were promised that wherever the blood was on the door, no harm would come to that household. They were also instructed to prepare unleavened bread. At midnight the death angel of the Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh himself to the lowest captive in a dungeon; not a single house of the Egyptians escaped tragedy. When Pharaoh saw what had happened, he ordered Moses and the people to leave the land at once (12:31-32). The biblical record says that about 600,000 Hebrew men left Egypt. Together with women and children, the total would have been in excess of 2 million people.<\/p>\n<h5>The Exodus from Egypt<\/h5>\n<p>The exodus is the central event of the OT and marks the birth of Israel as a nation. The Jewish people still look back to that event as the great redemptive act of God in history on behalf of his people, much as Christians look upon the cross as the great redemptive act of their faith.<\/p>\n\n<p>The exact route taken by the Hebrews out of Egypt cannot be determined today, though many possibilities have been proposed. They did not take the shortest, most direct route to Canaan (which would have been about a 10 days’ journey along the Mediterranean coastline), but set out in the direction of Mt Sinai, where Moses had earlier met God at the burning bush. As a sign that Moses had been sent to deliver the people, God told Moses he would bring them to that same spot, where they would worship God (Ex 3:12). The Hebrews did not forget the request of Joseph to carry his bones with them when they returned to their own land (Gn 50:25; Ex 13:19).<\/p>\n<p>As the people journeyed, they were preceded by a pillar of cloud during the day and a pillar of fire at night. The cloud represented the presence of God with his people and guided them along the route they should travel.<\/p>\n<p>Back in Egypt, Pharaoh was having second thoughts about letting the Hebrews leave the land and decided to pursue them with his army and bring them back. When the Hebrews saw the approaching cloud of dust and realized that the Egyptian army was pursuing them, they were terrified. The sea lay ahead of them and the Egyptians were behind; there seemed to be no way of escape. The people turned on Moses, blaming him for bringing them out of Egypt. God again assured them that they did not need to be afraid or do anything to defend themselves. He promised to fight the battle for them and give them victory (Ex 14:14).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord parted the water of the Sea of Reeds (traditionally but erroneously referred to as the Red Sea) by a strong east wind and allowed the Israelites to pass through the sea on dry ground to the other side. The Egyptians rushed after the Israelites, following them into the dry bed of the sea. But before they reached the other side, the waters rushed back together, destroying the Egyptian army in the midst of the sea and leaving the Israelites safe on the other side. The people celebrated their great deliverance in song (Ex 15) and then continued their journey. The narrative that follows describes the struggle of the Israelites to survive in the desert—problems of food and water, internal dissension, murmurings against Moses, and battles with enemies. Through all their experiences, Moses towers as the unifying force and great spiritual leader.<\/p>\n<p>In spite of having seen God’s great act of deliverance so recently, the faith of the Israelites was not strong. Three days later they came to a place where the water was not fit to drink, and they began complaining against Moses. The Lord showed Moses how to purify the water, and the people’s needs were satisfied (Ex 15:22-25). When they reached the wilderness of Sin, they complained again, this time because of lack of food. God met their need by supplying manna, a breadlike substance that would serve as their food until they came to Canaan (16:1-21). Later, camped at Rephidim, the people complained again, this time for lack of water. Once again God met their needs by supplying water from the rock at Horeb (17:1-7). The Amalekites attacked them while they were still camped at Rephidim, but God gave a great victory to the Israelites (vv 8-13).<\/p>\n<p>Moses and the people reached Sinai and camped there. Jethro came to visit, bringing Moses’ wife and sons. Zipporah had apparently decided to return with her children to stay with her father rather than to go on to Egypt with Moses. It was a joyful reunion, and Jethro made a burnt offering and sacrifices to God (an act that has evoked the suggestion that Jethro was a true worshiper of God, though nothing is known of his links to the Hebrew faith). When Jethro observed Moses trying to settle all the disputes and problems of the Hebrews unaided, he proposed that Moses delegate responsibility for some of the lesser matters to able men chosen from among the people. Moses accepted the suggestion, and shortly afterward Jethro returned to his own land. He did not remain at Sinai to participate in the ratification of the covenant (Ex 18:13-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Giving of the Law at Sinai<\/h5>\n<p>God had kept his promises to Moses. He had delivered the Hebrews from their Egyptian bondage and brought them to the very place where he had commissioned Moses to be their leader. He was now ready to enter into a covenant relationship with Israel. Amid a spectacular and terrifying scene of lightning, thunder, thick clouds, fire, smoke, and earthquake, God descended to the top of Sinai and called Moses to come up the mountain, where he remained 40 days to receive the law that would become the basis of the covenant.<\/p>\n<p>At Sinai, God was revealed as the God who demands exclusive allegiance in all areas of life and, at the same time, as the God who desires personal fellowship with his people.<\/p>\n<h5>Apostasy of the People<\/h5>\n<p>While Moses tarried on Mt Sinai, the people below became impatient and skeptical about his return, so they went to Aaron and asked him to make idols for them to worship. They contributed the gold earrings they were wearing. “Then Aaron took the gold, melted it down, and molded and tooled it into the shape of a calf. The people exclaimed, ‘O Israel, these are the gods who brought you out of Egypt!’ ” (Ex 32:4, <span>nlt<\/span>). The next day they joined in the worship of the idol with sacrifices and revelry. God told Moses what was taking place below and angrily declared that he was going to destroy the people but would make a great nation of Moses and his descendants. Moses immediately interceded on behalf of the people, and God’s wrath abated. Moses descended the mountain, carrying the two tablets of stone on which the law had been written, but when he entered the camp and saw what was taking place, he could not restrain his anger. He threw the stone tablets to the ground, ground the golden calf to powder, mixed it with water, and forced the people to drink it. He turned angrily to Aaron and demanded an explanation for the great sin that had been committed. Aaron lamely tried to shift the blame by minimizing his own role: “I threw them [the gold] into the fire—and out came this calf!” (v 24, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses called for volunteers to carry out God’s judgment on the people for the great sin they had committed. Men of the tribe of Levi responded and executed about 3,000 men. Later they were commended and rewarded (Dt 33:9-10). Moses again interceded for the people, requesting that he be destroyed with the rest if God could not forgive them. God relented and promised Moses that the angel of the Lord would go with them still (Ex 32:34).<\/p>\n<p>Then Moses made a special request that he might be allowed to see the glory of the Lord. God instructed Moses to hew out two more tablets of stone like the ones he had destroyed and to return to the top of the mountain the next day. There the Lord passed before him and proclaimed his name: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, the merciful and gracious God. I am slow to anger and rich in unfailing love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Moses remained on the mountain another 40 days, where he received renewed warnings against idolatry and further instructions from the Lord, together with another copy of the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone. When Moses came down from the mountain, he was not aware that the skin of his face shone as a result of talking with God. At first the people were afraid to come near him, but he called them together and repeated all the Lord had said to him on the mountain. Afterward, he covered his face with a veil, which he removed only when he went into the presence of the Lord. Paul said the purpose of the veil was to prevent the people from seeing the heavenly light gradually fade from Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:13).<\/p>\n<h5>The Tabernacle and Establishment of the Priesthood<\/h5>\n<p>When Moses went up to the mountain the first time to receive the law from God, he was instructed to collect materials to be used in the construction of the tabernacle or tent. Gold, silver, bronze, blue and purple and scarlet yarn, fine twined linen, goats’ hair, tanned rams’ skins, goatskins, and acacia wood would be needed, along with oil for the lamps, spices for the anointing oil and for the fragrant incense, onyx stones, and stones for setting (Ex 25:3-7). The pattern for construction was also given to him, together with the ritual to be used for the consecration of the priests. A man named Bezalel was put in charge of the construction of the tabernacle, assisted by Oholiab (31:1-6). The tabernacle was portable like a tent so that it could be taken down and moved from place to place as the Hebrews continued their journey toward Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to giving Moses directions for the tabernacle, God also instructed him concerning the sacrifices that were to be brought: the burnt offering, grain offering, peace offering, sin offering, and guilt offering (Lv 1–7). The solemn ceremony for ordaining Aaron and his sons as priests and for inaugurating the worship practices were to be performed by Moses (chs 8–9).<\/p>\n<p>Sometime after this solemn inauguration of the religious ritual actually took place, Nadab and Abihu, two of Aaron’s four sons, offered unauthorized fire before the Lord. A fire came out from the Lord and destroyed them. Moses forbade Aaron and his sons Eleazar and Ithamar to express grief because of the sinfulness of the act (Lv 10:1-7). The nature of their sin is difficult to determine, but it surely involved a violation of God’s holiness. Therefore, it is appropriate that a large part of the remainder of the book of Leviticus gives regulations that stress the holy living that God expected from his people.<\/p>\n<h5>From Sinai to Kadesh<\/h5>\n<p>A year had elapsed from the time the Israelites left Egypt until the census was taken (Nm 9:1). God reminded the people that it was time to observe the Passover, which they did, and a month later they set out from Sinai and came to the wilderness of Paran. Along the way they complained about the unvarying diet of manna and they longed for the fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic they had eaten in Egypt (11:4-6). In anger God sent quail in abundance, but even while the people were devouring the meat, God sent a great plague that killed many Israelites. The complaining attitude of the people was shared even by Miriam and Aaron. They began to speak against the Cushite woman Moses had married (12:1-2). It is not certain whether the Cushite was an Ethiopian or whether this was another way of referring to Zipporah. If Moses did marry a second time, no mention is made of it elsewhere in the OT. Moses made no reply to the accusations of his brother and sister. It was not necessary, for God intervened in defense of his servant. He smote Miriam with leprosy for her part in speaking against Moses, and when Aaron saw what had happened to Miriam, he acknowledged that they both had sinned. Miriam’s leprosy was removed in response to Moses’ fervent intercession.<\/p>\n\n<p>While the people were encamped at Kadesh (also called Kadesh-barnea—Nm 32:8) in the wilderness of Paran, Moses sent 12 men into Canaan, one from each tribe, to spy out the land in preparation for the Israelite entry. After 40 days the spies returned and, though they acknowledged that the land was fertile and inviting, 10 of them were afraid of the Canaanite inhabitants and advised against going into the land. Only Joshua and Caleb were willing to go ahead and occupy the territory. The entire congregation joined the protest against going in and determined to choose a new leader and return to Egypt rather than risk death by the sword in Canaan. They threatened to stone Moses and Aaron. At that moment God intervened and would have destroyed all the people on the spot except for the intervention of Moses (13:1–14:19). He declared that, if God did not bring the people into Canaan, the nations round about would conclude that the God of the Israelites was unable to bring them into the land. Once again God acquiesced to Moses’ request to pardon the people but said that none of them 20 years and older who had complained against him would be allowed to enter the land. All the people would wander in the wilderness for 40 years until that generation died, and then their children would be allowed to enter Canaan (14:29-33). When they heard the Lord’s sentence upon them, the people quickly decided to lift the sentence of judgment by entering the land at once, but God was not with them, and they suffered a disastrous defeat at the hands of the Amalekites and Canaanites.<\/p>\n<h5>Forty Years in the Wilderness<\/h5>\n<p>Very little is known about events during the 40 years of wilderness wanderings. In spite of the judgment that had already come upon them, the people did not seem to change their ways. A man named Korah led another rebellion against the authority of Moses and Aaron. God would not listen to the pleas of Moses and Aaron on behalf of these dissidents (Nm 16:22-24), but told the congregation to separate itself from the tents of Korah and his conspirators. While the people watched, the ground split open and swallowed up the rebellious factions together with their households and all their possessions. Though the rest of the Israelites witnessed the fate of the rebels, it did not deter them from again turning on Moses and Aaron. At this, God told Moses to remove himself from the murmuring congregation in order that he could take vengeance. Though Moses offered atonement for the people’s sins, 14,700 died by plague before the punishment was ended. To demonstrate further to the people that Moses was his chosen leader, the Lord instructed Moses to take rods, one for each tribe, and to deposit them in the tent of meeting. God would cause the rod of the man chosen by him to sprout, and so silence the murmurings of the people. The rod belonging to Aaron sprouted and budded and bloomed, but the people only complained more.<\/p>\n<p>As the people neared the end of their years of wilderness wanderings, Miriam died in Kadesh and was buried there (Nm 20:1). Soon after, the people began to complain once more for lack of water. God instructed Moses to speak to a rock that would bring forth water to satisfy the needs of the people. Instead of speaking to the rock, Moses struck it twice with his rod. The water came forth, but God rebuked Moses and Aaron: “Because you did not trust me enough to demonstrate my holiness to the people of Israel, you will not lead them into the land I am giving them!” (v 12, <span>nlt<\/span>). The nature of the sin is not clear, but Moses and Aaron were apparently taking to themselves honor that belonged to God alone. Because of the sin, they were denied the privilege of leading the Israelites into the Promised Land. The punishment may seem too severe for the sin, but it shows that the privileged role of leadership given to Moses and Aaron carried with it an unusual measure of responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>The people then journeyed from Kadesh to Mt Hor on the border of the land of Edom, where Aaron died. Moses took his priestly garments from him and gave them to Eleazar, his son, thereby transferring the priestly office (Nm 20:28).<\/p>\n<p>As the people came closer to their destination, resistance on the part of the native population increased. There was a skirmish with the king of Arad and his forces at Hormah, resulting in a victory for Israel (Nm 21:1-3). As they journeyed around Edom, some of the Israelites began speaking against God and Moses because there was no food or water and they were tired of eating manna. This time the Lord sent poisonous snakes among the people, and many of them died of the venomous bites. Those who had not yet been bitten came to Moses, acknowledged their sin, and asked that the serpents be removed from their midst. God instructed Moses to make a serpent of bronze and set it on a pole. If a person bitten by a serpent looked up at the bronze serpent, he or she would live.<\/p>\n<p>As the Israelites approached the territory of Sihon, king of the Amorites, they sent messengers asking permission to pass peaceably through his land. Instead of granting the request, Sihon gathered his army together and fought against Israel. He was killed in the battle, and his land and cities were taken and occupied by the Hebrews (Nm 21:21-25).<\/p>\n<h5>Arrival at the Jordan River<\/h5>\n<p>After their victory over Sihon, the Israelites set out again and encamped in the plains of Moab on the east side of the Jordan River facing Jericho, in full view of the Promised Land. The Moabites were terrified by the presence of these people because they had heard what happened to the Amorites. Their king, Balak, hired a magician named Balaam to curse the Israelites. Three times Balaam attempted to curse them, but each time God turned his words into a blessing (Nm 22–24). Though unable to curse the Israelites, Balaam was responsible for an even greater calamity. He advised the Moabites to entice the Israelites to sacrifice to their gods and bow down to them (Nm 25:1-3; 31:16; 2 Pt 2:15; Rv 2:14). While the people were worshiping the Moabite deity, Baal of Peor, God’s anger was kindled against them, and he sent a plague that killed 24,000 of them (Nm 25:9). It was Israel’s first encounter with the seductive allurement of licentious idolatry and an ominous foreview of what would happen after they settled down in Canaan. Their continued attraction to idolatry would be their final undoing.<\/p>\n<p>After the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar to take another census of the people like the one almost 40 years earlier. A whole generation of Israelites had died in the wilderness, but they had been replaced by an almost equal number, so that now there were 601,730 men 20 years and older who were able to go to war (Nm 26:51). Not a man remained of those who had been counted in the first census, except Caleb and Joshua.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord instructed Moses to lay hands on Joshua and commission him as the new leader in the sight of Eleazar the priest and all the congregation (Nm 27:12-23). In addition, the Lord gave Moses instructions concerning feasts and offerings and vows (chs 28–30). God ordered Moses, as his last act as leader, to avenge the Israelites on the Midianites. In that battle the armies of Israel gained a great victory over the Midianites, killing their kings, their men, and also Balaam.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord gave instructions to Moses concerning the boundaries that would mark the Promised Land and named the men who would divide the land among the tribes (Nm 34). He also ordered that 48 cities be given to the Levites, the priestly tribe, as their portion. Six of these were designated as cities of refuge where murderers could flee so that they would not be killed by those seeking vengeance without having an opportunity to stand before the congregation for judgment (ch 35).<\/p>\n<h5>Moses’ Death<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Deuteronomy has often been called Moses’ valedictory speech to the people, for in it Moses is not merely the chief speaker but the only speaker. With the congregation of his people gathered before him, he rehearsed all that God had done for them since leaving Sinai, and he reminded them of their failure to enter the Promised Land 38 years earlier (Dt 2:14). He recalled his plea that God would let him cross the Jordan and see the land that was to be the home of the people, but God responded that Moses would only be allowed to view the land from the top of Pisgah. Moses then exhorted the people to obey the statutes and ordinances that had been given to them in order to experience God’s blessings in the land.<\/p>\n\n<p>As the day of Moses’ death approached, the Lord ordered Moses and Joshua to present themselves at the tent of meeting in order for Joshua to be commissioned as the new leader (Dt 31:14-23). Before his death, Moses pronounced a blessing upon all the Israelites (ch 33). Having completed these tasks, Moses went up from the plains of Moab to Mt Nebo, and to the top of Pisgah. From there God showed him the land promised long ago to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the land that was soon to be the home of the wandering Israelite tribes. Again God told him that he would not be allowed to cross over the Jordan. Moses died there and God buried him somewhere in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor (34:6). Moses was 120 years old when he died, and the Israelites mourned his death for 30 days. The finest tribute to Moses is found in the closing words of the book of Deuteronomy, “There has never been another prophet like Moses, whom the <span>Lord<\/span> knew face to face” (v 10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MosesintheNewTestament\">Moses in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>All Jews and Christians in apostolic times considered Moses the author of the Pentateuch. Such expressions as “the law of Moses” (Lk 2:22), “Moses commanded” (Mt 19:7), “Moses said” (Mk 7:10) “and Moses wrote” (12:19) shows that his name was synonymous with the OT books attributed to him. He is mentioned in the NT more than any other OT figure, a total of 79 times. His role as lawgiver is emphasized more than any other aspect of his life (Mt 8:4; Mk 7:10; Jn 1:17; Acts 15:1). He appears at the transfiguration of Jesus as the representative of OT law, along with Elijah as the representative of OT prophets (Mt 17:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>Moses’ role as prophet is also mentioned in the NT. As a prophet, he spoke of the coming Messiah and his sufferings (Lk 24:25-27; Acts 3:22). The NT also draws from the life and experiences of Moses to show patterns of life under the new covenant. The nativity story of Jesus parallels the Mosaic story of the infant deliverer being rescued from the evil designs of an earthly despot (Mt 2:13-18). Jesus’ proclamation of a new law in his Sermon on the Mount parallels the giving of the law at Sinai (Mt 5–7) and presents Jesus as the authoritative interpreter of the will of God. Contrast between the old law and the new relationship with God is especially marked in the book of Galatians. The comparison of Moses with Christ is an important emphasis of the book of Hebrews (Heb 3:5-6; 9:11-22). John contrasted the law that was given through Moses with the grace and truth that came through Jesus Christ (Jn 1:17). He also contrasted the manna in the wilderness to Jesus as “the bread of life” (6:30-35).<\/p>\n<p>Other references to Moses or to events associated with him include his birth (Acts 7:20; Heb 11:23), the burning bush (Lk 20:37), the magicians of Egypt (2 Tm 3:8), the Passover (Heb 11:28), the exodus (3:16), crossing of the sea (1 Cor 10:2), the covenant sacrifice at Sinai (Mt 26:28), the manna (1 Cor 10:3), the glory on Moses’ face (2 Cor 3:7-18), water from the rock (1 Cor 10:4), the bronze serpent (Jn 3:14), and the song of Moses (Rv 15:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Egypt, Egyptian; Exodus, The; Israel, History of; Plagues upon Egypt; Priests and Levites; Tabernacle; Temple; Commandments, The Ten; Wilderness Wanderings.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","summary_en":"MOSES Great leader of the Hebrew people who brought them out of bondage in Egypt to the Promised Land in Canaan; also the one who gave them the law at Mt Sinai that became the basis for their religious faith through the centuries. Focused in this one person are the figures of prophet, priest, lawgiver, judge, intercessor, shepherd, miracle worker, and founder of a nation. The meaning of his name is uncertain. It has been explained as a Hebrew word meaning “to draw out” (Ex 2:10; cf. 2 Sm 22:1...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30137,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pharisees","title_en":"Pharisees","content_ro":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHARISEES<\/h3>\n<p>Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling the literal details of the law, and insensitive to the spiritual significance of the OT. These and other characteristics are furthermore viewed as giving shape to Judaism more generally.<\/p>\n<p>There are several problems with this common perception of Pharisaic Judaism. In the first place, the Gospels themselves give some important information that appears inconsistent with this view. Second, the primary documents of rabbinic Judaism (such as the Mishnah, the Talmud, and the Midrashim) are positive and praiseworthy. Third, it has become increasingly clear, especially since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, that prior to <span>AD<\/span> 70 the Pharisees constituted only a small movement in a highly diversified society; whatever their popularity and influence, they can hardly be taken as representative of Judaism in general.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>The origins of the Pharisees are obscure. According to Jewish tradition, Pharisaic (= rabbinic) Judaism can be traced back to Ezra and the beginnings of the scribal movement in the fifth century <span>BC<\/span>. At the opposite extreme, a few scholars argue that, since there are no explicit references to the Pharisees in historical documents prior to the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Pharisaism appeared suddenly after the Maccabean revolt (167 <span>BC<\/span>). Many specialists take the position that perhaps as early as the third century <span>BC<\/span> one can find evidence of an incipient form of Pharisaism (as in The Wisdom of Joshua [Jesus] ben Sirach, also known as Ecclesiasticus). It may well be, moreover, that the intellectual pursuits associated with the work of the scribes did have something to do with the development of the Pharisees. It is also probable that prior to the Maccabean revolt some distinctive Pharisaic concerns appeared in connection with the development of the Hasidim (“the faithful ones”—traditionalists who opposed Greek influence in Jewish society).<\/p>\n<p>According to a popular and reasonable interpretation, the Hasidim became disillusioned with the Maccabean rulers, whose conduct violated Jewish sensibilities in several respects. Some of the Hasidim separated themselves from the nation and developed into nonconformist sects, such as that of the Essenes. Those who remained tried to exert their influence on Jewish life and developed into the sect of the Pharisees.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees no doubt played a significant role in Jewish affairs during the next century, even though at times they had little political clout. By NT times, they were widely recognized as religious leaders. Josephus, who tells us that he belonged to this sect, wrote toward the end of the first century <span>AD<\/span> that the Pharisees were “extremely influential among the townsfolk; and all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their exposition. This is the great tribute that the inhabitants of the cities, by practicing the highest ideal both in their way of living and in their discourse, have paid to the excellence of the Pharisees” (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.15). We cannot determine whether this description applies to the period before <span>AD<\/span> 70, but the evidence of the Gospels themselves confirms it to some extent. For example, the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14), while it condemns the Pharisee, makes sense only if we appreciate the role reversal it announces: the wicked publican, not the one generally regarded as righteous, goes home justified.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BasicCharacteristics\">Basic Characteristics<\/p>\n<p>It is not possible to give an accurate characterization of the Pharisees, since scholars disagree sharply concerning their fundamental distinctiveness. Some stress the notion of “separateness,” partly on the basis of the supposed etymology of the name (from Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">parush<\/span><em>,<\/em> “separated one,” though other suggestions have been made). A more carefully nuanced viewpoint calls attention to the Pharisees’ concern with ritual purity (cf. Mk 7:1-4). Some of the evidence indicates that the Pharisees wished to apply the priestly rituals to the people generally (this factor may help to explain the relative ease with which the Pharisees adapted to the absence of the temple and its sacrifices after <span>AD<\/span> 70). Still another position sees the Pharisees as the scholar class. The close connection between them and the scribes (experts in the law) gives credence to this view, as does the fact that much of the later rabbinic literature reflects an intellectual pursuit, particularly in its detailed logical argumentations regarding the meaning and application of the Torah.<\/p>\n<p>These various approaches are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, there appears to be widespread agreement about one theological conviction that was foundational to Pharisaism, namely, their commitment to the notion of a twofold law: the written Torah (the OT, principally the Pentateuch) and the oral Torah (the traditions handed down through many generations of rabbis). This is certainly one feature that distinguished them from the Sadducees (cf. Josephus’s <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.297-98). The latter accepted only the authority of the books of Moses and argued strongly that the importance that the Pharisees attached to oral traditions represented an unjustifiable innovation. These traditions, which sought to regulate the lives of the people before God, became more and more detailed over the course of time and were eventually brought together and written down as a single document, the Mishnah (dated c. <span>AD<\/span> 210). Somewhere in its development the view arose that the oral law itself had been given by God to Moses and thus shared divine authority with the Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p>A careful look at the NT helps in understanding that this feature more than anything else explains the nature of the conflict between the Pharisaic viewpoint and the message of the gospel. The apostle Paul, for example, stresses the distinctiveness of his apostolic preaching by contrasting it to “the traditions of the fathers,” which he zealously pursued in his youth (Gal 1:14). Especially instructive is the key passage in Mark 7, where it is written that the Pharisees complained to Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with ‘unclean’ hands?” (v 5, <span>niv<\/span>). Christ’s reply counters their criticism with a serious indictment: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. . . . Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down” (vv 8, 13 ; cf. Mt 15:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The importance the Pharisees attributed to their interpretations of the law compromised the authority of God’s own revelation. To make matters worse, the genius of those interpretations was to distort the doctrine of grace by relaxing the divine standards. The very example used by Jesus in Mark 7:10-12 indicates that a rabbinic regulation—the Corban—made it possible for people to ignore the fifth commandment and feel justified in so doing.<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisaic regulations were numerous and aggravating, but at least they could be fulfilled. Those who followed scrupulously the rabbinic traditions were in danger of concluding that their conduct satisfied God’s demands (cf. Paul’s description of his own preconversion attitude, Phil 3:6). And a muted sense of one’s sin goes hand in hand with a false sense of spiritual security; the need to depend on God’s mercy no longer appears crucial. This is, of course, the point of the parable of the publican and the Pharisee (Lk 18:9-14). In contrast, Jesus calls for a much higher righteousness than that of the Pharisees: “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect” (Mt 5:48; cf. v 20).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Essenes; Jew; Judaism; Sadducees; Talmud; Torah; Tradition; Tradition, Oral.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","summary_en":"PHARISEES Religious sect active in Palestine during the NT period. The Pharisees are consistently depicted in the Gospels as Jesus’ antagonists. It is commonly held that the Pharisees represented mainstream Judaism early in the first century and that they were characterized by a variety of morally objectionable features. Accordingly, most Bible dictionaries and similar works of reference depict the Pharisees as greedy, hypocritical, lacking a sense of justice, overly concerned with fulfilling...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":7545,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corban*","title_en":"Corban*","content_ro":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","summary_en":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36714,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cumi*, Talitha","title_en":"Cumi*, Talitha","content_ro":"<h3>TALITHA CUMI*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic words spoken by Jesus and retained by Mark in his Gospel (Mk 5:41). Jairus, a synagogue official in the Galilean region, called on Jesus to heal his sick daughter; however, she died before Jesus arrived. Coming to the girl, Jesus took her hand and said, <em>“Talitha cumi,”<\/em> meaning “Little girl, arise.” <em>“Talitha”<\/em> is a term of affection meaning “lamb” or “youth.” <em>“Cumi”<\/em> is a command to rise up, translated by Mark as “I say to you, arise!”<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel, Mark includes other Aramaic phrases attributed to Jesus (Mk 3:17; 5:41; 7:11, 34; 11:9-10; 14:36; 15:22, 34). Matthew retains only two Aramaic phrases (Mt 27:33, 46), and Luke keeps none.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TALITHA CUMI*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic words spoken by Jesus and retained by Mark in his Gospel (Mk 5:41). Jairus, a synagogue official in the Galilean region, called on Jesus to heal his sick daughter; however, she died before Jesus arrived. Coming to the girl, Jesus took her hand and said, <em>“Talitha cumi,”<\/em> meaning “Little girl, arise.” <em>“Talitha”<\/em> is a term of affection meaning “lamb” or “youth.” <em>“Cumi”<\/em> is a command to rise up, translated by Mark as “I say to you, arise!”<\/p>\n<p>In his Gospel, Mark includes other Aramaic phrases attributed to Jesus (Mk 3:17; 5:41; 7:11, 34; 11:9-10; 14:36; 15:22, 34). Matthew retains only two Aramaic phrases (Mt 27:33, 46), and Luke keeps none.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TALITHA CUMI* Aramaic words spoken by Jesus and retained by Mark in his Gospel (Mk 5:41). Jairus, a synagogue official in the Galilean region, called on Jesus to heal his sick daughter; however, she died before Jesus arrived. Coming to the girl, Jesus took her hand and said, “Talitha cumi,” meaning “Little girl, arise.” “Talitha” is a term of affection meaning “lamb” or “youth.” “Cumi” is a command to rise up, translated by Mark as “I say to you, arise!” In his Gospel, Mark includes other Ara...","summary_en":"TALITHA CUMI* Aramaic words spoken by Jesus and retained by Mark in his Gospel (Mk 5:41). Jairus, a synagogue official in the Galilean region, called on Jesus to heal his sick daughter; however, she died before Jesus arrived. Coming to the girl, Jesus took her hand and said, “Talitha cumi,” meaning “Little girl, arise.” “Talitha” is a term of affection meaning “lamb” or “youth.” “Cumi” is a command to rise up, translated by Mark as “I say to you, arise!” In his Gospel, Mark includes other Ara...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38084,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Vows Vow","title_en":"Vows Vow","content_ro":"<h3>VOW, VOWS<\/h3>\n<p>Serious promises or pledges made to God. The making of vows to God is a religious practice frequently mentioned in Scripture. Most references to vows are found in the OT, especially in the Psalms, but there are a few in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike tithing, sacrifices and offerings, Sabbath keeping, and circumcision, vow making was not something commanded by the Mosaic law. For example, Psalm 50:14 says, “Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High” (<span>rsv<\/span>). The command is to “pay,” that is, to keep or fulfill a pledge that has already been made. No order is given to make such promises in the first place. The practice is accepted and regulated but not demanded.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of a vow is to win a desired favor from the Lord, to express gratitude to him for some deliverance or benefit, or simply to prove absolute devotion to him by way of certain abstinences. Dedication of oneself and separation to the Lord were the primary features of the Nazirite vow. Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist are the most familiar examples of those who took this type of vow. Numbers 6:1-8 prescribes the conditions of this commitment, and verses 13-21 tell how release from the vow may be obtained. Women, as well as men, might take this vow of separation (v 2), which could be of limited duration. The Recabite clan pledged themselves to an ascetic and nomadic life. They constitute a compelling illustration of loyalty to the God of Israel (Jer 35).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently, however, vows were taken as a type of bargain with God. At Bethel, Jacob promised God worship and the tithe if he would protect him and supply his needs (Gn 28:20-22). Hannah pledged that if God would give her a son, she would return him to God (1 Sm 1:11, 27-28). In the Psalms, payment of vows is often associated with thanksgiving for deliverance from danger or affliction (e.g., Pss 22:24-25; 56:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Most important is that once a vow is made, the obligation is serious. To refrain from making any vow is no sin (Dt 23:22), but once declared, the vow must be kept (Dt 23:21-23; see also Nm 30:2; Eccl 5:4-6).<\/p>\n<p>The term “vow” occurs just twice in the NT, both times in association with the apostle Paul (Acts 18:18; 21:23-24). But the same principle is involved in the case of the word “Corban” (Mk 7:11-13; cf. Mt 15:5-6). In these two passages Jesus severely rebuked those who made a vow that served as a clever escape from meeting obligations to care for aged parents. A monetary figure was involved in such a “gift” or “offering.” But Jesus declared that God did not want a gift designed to deprive someone.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of Paul, he may have entered into his vows for the very purpose of averting objections that either antagonistic Jews or Jewish-Christian believers had to his removing the yoke of Mosaic regulations from the shoulders of gentile believers. Paul was in Jerusalem under the keen surveillance of Jewish authorities. He made it a point to join with four other Jewish believers in the payment of vows in the temple. This action, however, was misconstrued by his enemies, who charged that he was bringing Gentiles into the holy temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Oath.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>VOW, VOWS<\/h3>\n<p>Serious promises or pledges made to God. The making of vows to God is a religious practice frequently mentioned in Scripture. Most references to vows are found in the OT, especially in the Psalms, but there are a few in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike tithing, sacrifices and offerings, Sabbath keeping, and circumcision, vow making was not something commanded by the Mosaic law. For example, Psalm 50:14 says, “Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High” (<span>rsv<\/span>). The command is to “pay,” that is, to keep or fulfill a pledge that has already been made. No order is given to make such promises in the first place. The practice is accepted and regulated but not demanded.<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of a vow is to win a desired favor from the Lord, to express gratitude to him for some deliverance or benefit, or simply to prove absolute devotion to him by way of certain abstinences. Dedication of oneself and separation to the Lord were the primary features of the Nazirite vow. Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist are the most familiar examples of those who took this type of vow. Numbers 6:1-8 prescribes the conditions of this commitment, and verses 13-21 tell how release from the vow may be obtained. Women, as well as men, might take this vow of separation (v 2), which could be of limited duration. The Recabite clan pledged themselves to an ascetic and nomadic life. They constitute a compelling illustration of loyalty to the God of Israel (Jer 35).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently, however, vows were taken as a type of bargain with God. At Bethel, Jacob promised God worship and the tithe if he would protect him and supply his needs (Gn 28:20-22). Hannah pledged that if God would give her a son, she would return him to God (1 Sm 1:11, 27-28). In the Psalms, payment of vows is often associated with thanksgiving for deliverance from danger or affliction (e.g., Pss 22:24-25; 56:12-13).<\/p>\n<p>Most important is that once a vow is made, the obligation is serious. To refrain from making any vow is no sin (Dt 23:22), but once declared, the vow must be kept (Dt 23:21-23; see also Nm 30:2; Eccl 5:4-6).<\/p>\n<p>The term “vow” occurs just twice in the NT, both times in association with the apostle Paul (Acts 18:18; 21:23-24). But the same principle is involved in the case of the word “Corban” (Mk 7:11-13; cf. Mt 15:5-6). In these two passages Jesus severely rebuked those who made a vow that served as a clever escape from meeting obligations to care for aged parents. A monetary figure was involved in such a “gift” or “offering.” But Jesus declared that God did not want a gift designed to deprive someone.<\/p>\n<p>In the case of Paul, he may have entered into his vows for the very purpose of averting objections that either antagonistic Jews or Jewish-Christian believers had to his removing the yoke of Mosaic regulations from the shoulders of gentile believers. Paul was in Jerusalem under the keen surveillance of Jewish authorities. He made it a point to join with four other Jewish believers in the payment of vows in the temple. This action, however, was misconstrued by his enemies, who charged that he was bringing Gentiles into the holy temple.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Covenant; Oath.<\/p>","summary_ro":"VOW, VOWS Serious promises or pledges made to God. The making of vows to God is a religious practice frequently mentioned in Scripture. Most references to vows are found in the OT, especially in the Psalms, but there are a few in the NT. Unlike tithing, sacrifices and offerings, Sabbath keeping, and circumcision, vow making was not something commanded by the Mosaic law. For example, Psalm 50:14 says, “Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High” (rsv). The com...","summary_en":"VOW, VOWS Serious promises or pledges made to God. The making of vows to God is a religious practice frequently mentioned in Scripture. Most references to vows are found in the OT, especially in the Psalms, but there are a few in the NT. Unlike tithing, sacrifices and offerings, Sabbath keeping, and circumcision, vow making was not something commanded by the Mosaic law. For example, Psalm 50:14 says, “Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay your vows to the Most High” (rsv). The com...","source":"Articles\/V.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55297,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","summary_en":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82923,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","summary_en":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110549,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","summary_en":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138175,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:11-12<\/strong> <em>But you say:<\/em> The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • <em>‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’:<\/em> The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their <em>needy parents<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","summary_en":"7:11-12 But you say: The contrast with God’s law is emphatic—their tradition repudiated God’s command for people to honor their parents by providing for their needs. • ‘For I have vowed to give to God what I would have given to you’: The tradition said that people could sidestep their obligation to support their parents by dedicating some of their resources to God, thus disregarding and dishonoring their needy parents.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":7548,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Corban*","title_en":"Corban*","content_ro":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CORBAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">korban<\/span><em>)<\/em> that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering.<\/p>\n<p>Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span>) and was rarely reversed (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Nedarim<\/span> 5), for violation of a corban vow risked the severe consequences of divine judgment. In Mark 7 Jesus chastises the scribes because, theoretically, a son could exclude his parents from gaining any benefit from his estate by declaring his property “corban to them.” This in effect nullifies the fifth commandment (see Ex 20:12), setting rabbinic traditions against the law of Moses. Worse still, if the son repented of his vow—arguing that it had been given in haste—a rabbinic tribunal would no doubt forbid a reversal of corban (Mk 7:12; cf Nm 30:1-2).<\/p>","summary_ro":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","summary_en":"CORBAN* Greek transliteration of a Hebrew term (korban) that occurs only in Mark 7:11, where Mark provides an editorial explanation: corban is “given,” that is, “dedicated or given to God.” Hence, corban is an offering. Jewish law allowed individuals to earmark their service or property as “dedicated to God,” thus removing it from profane use and giving it the character of an offering intended for God. To do this was a serious decision (according to the Mishnah, Nedarim) and was rarely revers...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":38609,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","title_en":"Word, Word of God, Words of God","content_ro":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheImportanceofWords\">The Importance of Words<\/p>\n<p>In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, agreements, and records had little usefulness. Personal integrity and sincere speech were essential to communication and, for most people, to self-expression and stable relationships. The words of poets, prophets, storytellers, and instructors were carefully preserved.<\/p>\n<p>Words were diligently tested. Foolish words, flattery, deceit, words of enticement, lies, rumor, scandal, and blasphemous speech were all recognized as evil. The oath had to be inviolable in commercial, judicial, and civic affairs. The spoken blessing had power within itself and could not be withdrawn (Gn 27:30-38; Mt 10:12-13); so also the vow (Jgs 11:34-35) and the curse (Gn 27:12-13). Equally powerful was the word of command—of priestly, judicial, or royal authority (Eccl 8:4).<\/p>\n<p>This estimate of human words lingers in the NT. The word reveals the inner self, and so every careless, hurtful, deceitful word will be judged (Mt 12:34-37; 5:22), as will blasphemy (Lk 12:10). Paul (Eph 4:29; 5:4) and James (Jas 3:1-12) preserve this Hebrew reverence for the spoken word.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordsofGod\">The Words of God<\/p>\n<p>God’s spoken word has been preserved in Scripture. His word came to and through the prophets (1 Kgs 12:22; 1 Chr 17:3; cf. Lk 3:2), who spoke and acted “by the word of the Lord.” His word also came in the law, which God “spoke” on Sinai (Ex 20:1); hence, “statutes,” “commandments,” and “precepts” are synonyms for God’s “word” (e.g., Ps 119).<\/p>\n<p>Periods when no such divine communication came constituted “famine” (1 Sm 3:1; Am 8:11). Mingled with warnings and injunctions were divine promises. All God’s words were dependable (Is 31:2), firmly fixed in heaven (Ps 119:89; Is 40:8), and backed up by divine oath (Jer 1:12; Ps 110:4; Ez 12:25, 28). A word, expressing the divine mind, was not threatening or burdensome; it was a delight, hope, joy, and protection against sin (Pss 1; 119; Jer 15:16). Men can live by it (Dt 8:3; Mt 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>God’s word has power to execute his will. It will not return to him “empty” but accomplish that which he purposes (Is 55:11). By his speech alone, God created the world, and his word upholds it (Gn 1; Ps 33:6; cf. Heb 1:2; 11:3; 2 Pt 3:5). Eventually, this divine revelation was put into writing, which makes the Bible also “the word of God” (Mk 7:13; cf. Lk 16:29-31; Jn 5:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus spoke the word of God. He was “mighty in word” (Lk 24:19); he taught with authority (Mk 1:22, 27), exercising power over the sea, disease, demons, and death (Mt 8:8, 13). His “word of the kingdom” is the living seed, which, planted in the good soil of receptive hearts, bears fruit for God (Mt 13:19; Mk 4:14). The word that Christ gives to his disciples cleanses them and frees them (Jn 8:31; 12:48; 15:3; 17:14). The word of faith the church preaches (Rom 10:8-9, 17) is variously described as the word of salvation, the word of grace, the word of reconciliation, the word of the gospel, the word of righteousness, and the word of life.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheWordofGod\">The Word of God<\/p>\n<p>Deliberately recalling Genesis 1, the Gospel writer, John, named the Son of God “the Word.” As the Word, the Son of God fully conveys and communicates God. The Greek term is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span><em>;<\/em> it was used in two ways by the Greeks. The word might be thought of as remaining within a person, when it denoted his thought or reason. Or it might refer to the word going forth from a person, when it denoted the expression of his thought, i.e., speech. As a philosophical term, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> denoted the principle of the universe, even the creative energy that generated the universe. In both the Jewish conception and the Greek, the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">logos<\/span> was associated with the idea of beginnings—the world began through the origination and instrumentality of the Word (Gn 1:3ff., where the expression “God said” is used again and again). John may have had these ideas in mind, but most likely he originated a new term to identify the Son of God as the divine expression in human form (Jn 1:14). He is the image of the invisible God (Col 1:15), the express image of God’s substance (Heb 1:3). In the Godhead, the Son functions as the revealer of God and the reality of God, which is a central theme throughout John’s Gospel. John used a similar title in his first epistle: “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1-3). And in Revelation 19:11-16, Jesus is presented as the King of kings and Lord of lords, who has a name on him: “the Word of God.”<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bible; John, Gospel of; Logos; Revelation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","summary_en":"WORD, WORD OF GOD, WORDS OF GOD A “word” is an expression that communicates. On the level of human communication, “words “usually refer to verbal expression. When God “spoke” over the centuries, though, he communicated in various ways (Heb 1:1), culminating in that epitome of all divine expression, Jesus Christ, his Son. The Importance of Words In a mainly nonliterary society the dependability of the spoken word was all-important in law, trade, religion, marriage, and reputation. Receipts, ag...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55298,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","summary_en":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82924,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","summary_en":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110550,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","summary_en":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138176,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:13","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:13<\/strong> The result of such traditions was to <em>cancel the word of God<\/em>. • <em>only one example among many others:<\/em> It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","summary_en":"7:13 The result of such traditions was to cancel the word of God. • only one example among many others: It was not an isolated instance; see, e.g., Isa 1:10-20; 58:1-14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":6880,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Regulations concerning Cleanness and Uncleanness","title_en":"and Uncleanness, Regulations concerning, Cleanness","content_ro":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\n<p>Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\n<p>Cleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the <span>Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, <span>rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early History<\/p>\n<p>• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<p>• Purification Rites<\/p>\n<p>• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyHistory\">Early History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\n<p>The gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\n<p>The similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LeviticalPrescriptions\">Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\n<p>The relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\n<p>From the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, <span>rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\n<p>Certain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\n<p>The land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\n<p>The temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\n<p>An unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\n<p>Certain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurificationRites\">Purification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\n<p>Secondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\n<p>Contact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\n<p>Ceremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>Sacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>In sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\n<p>Some contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentPerspective\">New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\n<p>The intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\n<p>An important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning<\/h3>\n<p>Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people.<\/p>\n<p>The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and personal lines—God’s personal nature being expressed in his giving of the law to Moses. The personal and uniquely consistent character of Israel’s Lord made him morally a completely different being from the many gods of pagan cultures. Unlike the Lord, the Baals of the Canaanites were capricious and vicious; nobody expected them to be ethically consistent. Israel’s Lord, on the other hand, could be trusted to keep his word (a verbal communication through his chosen prophets). Nobody, not even the high priest or the king, was above the law, which expressed not only God’s character but also his sovereign will for the individual and the nation. His moral consistency carried over into his miraculous interventions into history to protect his people, to judge them and their enemies, and to redeem humanity itself.<\/p>\n<p>Cleanness as defined in the book of Leviticus, therefore, was always conditioned by the presence of the personal God who gave the law. As the people sought to approach the Lord, they necessarily did so on his terms and therefore within the framework of the cultic ceremonies he had prescribed. Details of the Levitical ceremonies were designed to illustrate the moral implications of the sinner’s approach to God and God’s provision for his people to become morally clean in his sight.<\/p>\n<p>The meaning of the Levitical system was stated clearly in the psalmist’s words: “Who shall ascend the hill of the <span>Lord<\/span>? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully” (Ps 24:3-4, <span>rsv<\/span>). One’s state of cleanness depends not only on external actions but also on an internal relationship with God. As a result, the sinner’s inability to satisfy the moral demands of a holy God leads to his or her complete dependence on God and on God’s provision for satisfying his own demands. That provision was detailed in the law.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Early History<\/p>\n<p>• Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<p>• Purification Rites<\/p>\n<p>• New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarlyHistory\">Early History<\/p>\n<h5>Gentile Religious Background<\/h5>\n<p>The gentile conscience was no doubt a strong influence on the development of ethnic notions of clean and unclean. The subjective sense of sin’s uncleanness is universally encountered in one form or another in the literature of every great religion, whatever explanation is given for it. Many religions have rites of purification based on water and washings. The Hebrews’ ritual avoidance of certain objects, some because of their holiness and others because of their unholiness, finds an analogy in the taboos of many primitive religions, including some of those with which the early Hebrews came into contact.<\/p>\n<p>The similarities between the Hebrew and other ancient religions are easily established by superficial comparison. It would be surprising if there were none. Those differences that give biblical religion its distinctive character, however, must be accounted for.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LeviticalPrescriptions\">Levitical Prescriptions<\/p>\n<h5>Ceremonial and Moral Law<\/h5>\n<p>The relationship between the external ceremonial details of the Mosaic law and the internally directed moral requirements of such parts of it as the Ten Commandments is one of the fundamental issues of OT theology. It is possible to demonstrate that, throughout the OT, uncleanness and sin are virtually synonymous. In many passages sin is described as uncleanness (e.g., Lv 16:16, 30; the ordeal of the bitter water in Nm 5:11-28; Zec 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The relationship between ceremonial and moral cleanness can be illustrated from passages mentioning clean hands on the one hand (2 Sm 22:21; Jb 17:9; 22:30) and a clean heart on the other (Pss 24:4; 51:10; 73:13; Prv 20:9). The prophet Isaiah felt convicted of “unclean lips” when he was in God’s presence; a purifying coal, perhaps representing forgiveness and atonement, cleansed him (Is 6:5-7). In many passages cleanness represents innocence before God (Jb 11:4; 33:9; Ps 51:7-10; Prv 20:9), and uncleanness is said to come from sin (Ps 51:2; Is 1:16; 64:6).<\/p>\n<h5>Causes of Uncleanness<\/h5>\n<p>From the Mosaic law a number of causes of uncleanness can be derived.<\/p>\n<p>1. Some foods were not to be eaten. Various laws concerning animals make a “distinction between the unclean and the clean and between the living creature that may be eaten and the living creature that may not be eaten” (Lv 11:47, <span>rsv<\/span>). Permitted food was what was acceptable to God (see also Dt 14:3-21; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<li>2. Diseases, especially leprosy, produced an unclean state (Lv 13–14). The story of Naaman refers to leprous defilement (2 Kgs 5:1-14). The Gospels refer often to lepers (e.g., Mt 8:1-4; 10:8; 11:5; Lk 4:27). Many swellings, sores, and rashes were included under that heading, including Hansen’s disease (modern leprosy). The defilement of disease included all things touched by a diseased person (Lv 14:33-57).<\/li>\n<li>3. Bodily discharges were unclean, and contact with them defiled a person for various periods of time. Emission of semen produced uncleanness until the evening, whether in intercourse (Lv 15:16-18) or inadvertently during the night (Dt 23:10). An unnatural discharge, since it usually indicated disease, made a person unclean for seven days after it had ceased (Lv 15:1-15). Menstruation also produced uncleanness lasting seven days after it ceased (Lv 15:19-24; 2 Sm 11:4). Sexual intercourse during that time made both partners unclean (Lv 15:19-24; 20:18). Contact with the spittle of an unclean person produced uncleanness for a day (15:8).<\/li>\n<li>4. Dead bodies, or even parts of them such as bone, caused uncleanness (Nm 19:16). Persons who touched a dead body were unclean for a month, and only after that period could they celebrate their own Passover if they had missed it (9:6-11). The high priest could not even bury his own parents because of his special ritual responsibilities (Lv 21:10-11; cf. Nm 6:6-7; Hg 2:13; Mt 23:27).<\/li>\n<li>5. Idolatry was the greatest source of spiritual defilement. The entire nation of Israel was defiled because of it (Ps 106:38; Is 30:22; Ez 36:25), as were the Gentiles (Jer 43:12). Consequently, contact with Gentiles was thought to produce defilement. The gospel’s universal appeal confronted that conviction (e.g., Jn 4:9; Acts 10:28; cf. Gal 2:11-14). Closely related to the defilement of idolatry was the defilement caused by unclean spirits (Zec 13:2; cf. Mt 10:1; Mk 1:23-27).<\/li>\n<h5>Laws about Objects<\/h5>\n<p>Certain laws illustrate the principle that uncleanness was transmitted much like a contagion. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched, as did dead insects and certain crawling things (Lv 11:29-38). It is interesting that dry grain, running springwater, and water in a cistern were expressly excluded from that law of contamination; perhaps otherwise, starvation would have resulted, dead insects and mice being found in grain and water every day in an agricultural community. Unclean pottery had to be broken, but wooden vessels merely required washing (Lv 15:12). Even uncovered pots in a house where a person had died became unclean (Nm 19:15); everyone who entered the house was unclean.<\/p>\n<p>Because of their idolatrous associations, the possessions of pagans were unclean; therefore, booty taken in war had to be cleansed by fire or washing (Nm 31:21-24). Clothing of wool, linen, or leather could contract unclean “leprosy” from diseased persons and had to be tested. If the leprous spots (greenish or reddish patches) spread after a test period, the garments had to be burned (Lv 13:47-59; 14:33-53).<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Places<\/h5>\n<p>The land and people of Israel were holy; they could be defiled by the uncleanness of economic oppression or idolatry (Jos 22:17-19; Jer 13:27). Jerusalem was a holy city, but it could be defiled by the sins of its people (Ez 22:2-4; Lam 1:8) or by the blood of its slaughtered inhabitants (Lam 4:15).<\/p>\n<p>The temple could be defiled by unclean persons. It was necessary for Hezekiah to cleanse the temple after Ahaz’s idolatrous worship (2 Chr 29:15-19); Nehemiah had to cleanse the rooms in which Tobiah had been living (Neh 13:9). One of the functions of the Day of Atonement was removal of impurities transferred to the temple by the sins of the Israelites during the past year (Lv 16:16-19; 31-33).<\/p>\n<p>An unclean place received the pieces of a leprous house after its demolition (Lv 14:45). The valley of Hinnom became Jerusalem’s garbage dump in later years, giving rise to the visions of “Gehenna” as a place of eternal punishment in NT eschatology. Since the Israelite camp was a holy place, care was taken to bury human excrement outside its boundaries (Dt 23:12-14). The value of that simple expedient in preventing disease during military excursions can hardly be exaggerated, since plagues were a great scourge of ancient armies.<\/p>\n<h5>Laws about Food<\/h5>\n<p>Certain kinds of animals were unclean and thus could not be eaten (Lv 11; Dt 14:3-21). Animals that died of old age, disease, or injury, or had been wounded by predators, were unclean. Animals that did not both chew the cud and have a cloven hoof were unclean, a definition that included pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits among others. Israelites could eat only those fish that had both fins and scales. Birds of prey and scavengers were unclean. All winged insects were unclean except hopping insects (locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets). A large classification of “crawling things” was prohibited, including worms, lizards, snakes, weasels, and mice. In addition to all those was the ancient prohibition against eating blood (Gn 9:4; Lv 17:14-15; Dt 12:16-23; Acts 15:28-29).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurificationRites\">Purification Rites<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Lapse of Time<\/h5>\n<p>Secondary contamination could often be canceled simply by waiting until the evening (Lv 11:24) or for 7, 14, 40, or 80 days. Dead bodies contaminated what they touched for 7 days (Nm 19:11), as did menstruation (Lv 15:19). When a child was born, the mother’s unclean condition lasted 7 days for a boy and 14 days for a girl. An additional 33 days for a male child and 66 days for a female were required before the mother could touch any sacred thing.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Water<\/h5>\n<p>Contact with unclean things, such as bodily discharges, often required washing of hands and clothing, usually accompanied by the lapse of a day (Lv 15:5-11).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Ceremonial Substances<\/h5>\n<p>Ceremonial substances used in purification rites included the ashes of a red heifer mixed with water (Nm 19:1-10), and (in cases of leprosy) cedarwood, scarlet cloth, hyssop, and blood (Lv 14:2-9). When the altar was used in a purification ceremony, only blood was suitable, since the altar was the place of sacrifice for sin (Lv 16:18-19; Ez 43:20).<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Sacrifice<\/h5>\n<p>Sacrifice was the ultimate source of both ritual and moral purification. All bodily discharges except sexual ones were purified by offerings of doves and pigeons (Lv 15:14-15, 29-30). Childbirth required a lamb and a bird (12:6). Poor people could offer birds in place of an animal (Lv 12:8; 14:21-32; Lk 2:24).<\/p>\n<p>In sacrifice, blood was symbolic of a life given and therefore a death experienced; the uncleanness of disease or sin was thought of as being transferred to the victim, thus removing the uncleanness (Lv 14:7). Sacrificial death, therefore, always had a substitutionary element. Only blood sacrifice could provide the moral cleansing necessary for sin itself; such sacrifice was therefore the basis of all cleansing, including that of disease.<\/p>\n<h5>Purification by Fire<\/h5>\n<p>Some contamination could be removed only by fire, such as contamination of metal pots (Nm 31:22-23). Incest was punishable not only by death but also by burning the bodies (Lv 20:14). Idolatry had to be put away by total destruction of the objects and by burning (Ex 32:20). Cities consecrated to pagan deities were to be burned.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentPerspective\">New Testament Perspective<\/p>\n<p>The NT did not reject the OT concept of clean and unclean, but rather reinterpreted it in a new context. It stressed in particular the moral sense of the concept as well as the identification of uncleanness with sin.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels were written in the context of OT law and its Pharisaic and Sadducean accretions. Jesus obeyed the law but was often at odds with the practical casuistry (system) that had grown up around it. Jesus taught that true defilement came from the sinner’s heart and not from outside contamination (Mk 7:14-23; Lk 11:39-41). A central element in his teaching was his attack on the ceremonial externalism of the Pharisees. Thus it has been said that Jesus “internalized” the law. It would be more correct to say that he forced attention to the law’s demands on people’s inner lives.<\/p>\n<p>The intrinsic wickedness of demons is underscored by the use of the term “unclean spirit” throughout the Gospels. In fact, the word “unclean” itself always appears in the Gospels in the context of spirit, a detail that illustrates the NT shift of emphasis from ritual uncleanness to sin and its guilt.<\/p>\n<p>An important episode in the life of the early church came in Acts 10, when God taught the apostle Peter that Gentiles were not unclean in themselves and that Peter was obliged to receive them. The result was Cornelius’s conversion.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ assertion that uncleanness originates in the heart bore fruit in the apostle Paul’s doctrine of Christian freedom. Paul, a Pharisee who could say of himself that he had never broken an external law, came to see that nothing is unclean in itself (Rom 14:14-20). Throughout his epistles, cleanness is the result of obedience of the heart flowing from regeneration; it is based on the cleansing power of the Atonement (see Rom 6:19; 1 Thes 2:3-4, where uncleanness is strictly moral).<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s atonement was the final cleansing agent for sin and its moral results (Heb 9:14, 22; 1 Jn 1:7), doing in reality what the blood of bulls and goats only typified. Thus those who are washed in the blood of the Lamb (Rv 7:14) are seen as wearing clean white robes (15:6; 19:8-14). His blood, symbolizing the life given and the death died by the Son at the behest of the Father, satisfies the attributes of personal justice of the triune God. Because the personal character of a righteous Father was vindicated, the personal forgiveness of sinners is morally possible. God can be in history only what he is eternally: he is both just and the justifier of believers in Christ (Rom 3:24-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Baptism; Circumcision; Uncircumcision; Offerings and Sacrifices; Law, Biblical Concept of; Dietary Laws.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","summary_en":"CLEANNESS AND UNCLEANNESS, Regulations Concerning Aspect of Hebrew religion having physical, ceremonial, moral, and spiritual significance. Though these senses of clean and unclean can be distinguished with reference to their contexts, they also merge into and illustrate each other; the physical and ceremonial contexts point to a moral state of the worshiper and to a spiritual relationship between God and his people. The OT vision of a people’s relationship with God is along moral and persona...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24378,"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":55299,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","summary_en":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82925,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","summary_en":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110551,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","summary_en":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138177,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:14-23<\/strong> Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told <em>the crowd.<\/em> Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the <em>heart<\/em>. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no bearing on the moral issues of the soul. To help his later readers understand the implications of Jesus’ teaching, Mark adds the interpretive comment <em>By saying this, he declared that every kind of food is acceptable in God’s eyes<\/em>. In the apostolic church, Peter and Paul were instrumental in bringing this implication to light (see Acts 10:1–11:18; Rom 14:14; 1 Cor 8:8; Gal 2:11-21).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","summary_en":"7:14-23 Jesus’ second argument against the Pharisees was a proverb that Jesus told the crowd. Later, in the privacy of a home, Jesus explained it to his disciples (7:17-23). It concerns moral distinctions about eating. Eating affects the digestive system, but moral issues involve the heart. The heart is a metaphor for the seat of moral decision making. How a person eats (with clean or unclean hands) or what a person eats (clean or unclean food) affects only the digestive tract, so it has no b...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":65374,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93000,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120626,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148252,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":15727,"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}],"19":[{"id":12517,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Food and Food Preparation","title_en":"Food and Food Preparation","content_ro":"<h3>FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION<\/h3>\n<p>Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare with neighboring nations (2 Kgs 6:25), and intermittent plagues of locusts ravaged large areas.<\/p>\n<p>Food was more plentiful in Palestine (described as a “land flowing with milk and honey”) than in many other parts of the Near East. Shallow cultivation of the soil, however, made crops highly reliant on regular rainfall. Egyptian crops were far less susceptible to weather variations, because the Nile provided a dependable source of water.<\/p>\n<p>Food shortages were considered warnings or punishment from God (Lam 4:9, 11; Am 4:6-9) to teach the Hebrews that life is more than food and that faith must continue despite scarcity, famine, or even death (Dt 8:3; Hb 3:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The staples of nomadic Hebrews were milk, curds, and cheese. As the people became more stationary, they grew grains and vegetables and planted orchards and vineyards. Grain would sometimes be grown for a season, and then after the harvest, the tribes would move their flocks to other pastures and find other arable land. Religious sacrifices and festivals were times not only of solemnity but also of rejoicing and great feasting. Victories were also celebrated with banquets and feasting on the food obtained from the camp of the vanquished enemy.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>• Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>• Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>• Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>• Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DairyProducts\">Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>Milk and its by-products formed a vital part of the Hebrew diet (see Jgs 4:19). Goat’s milk was most frequently used, although milk from camels, cows, and sheep was also available (Gn 32:15; Dt 32:14; Prv 27:27).<\/p>\n<p>Since fresh milk could not be preserved in Palestine’s hot climate, it was processed into buttermilk, curds, and cheese. Milk was poured into goatskins, where it soured and thickened because of the nonsterile condition of the previously used skins and the movement as it was transported. That movement of the pouch (often made from a cow’s stomach, containing the enzyme rennin used in cheese making) produced curds. Curds are first mentioned in the Bible as part of the meal that Abraham provided for his extraordinary guests (Gn 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for curds <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">chena<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also translated “butter” (Jb 10:10). This butter would be similar in consistency to yogurt from which the water has been squeezed out. When pressed and rolled into small balls, it kept indefinitely, despite the climate. Thus, compressed curds were particularly valuable for journeys in arid regions where food was scarce.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GrainCrops\">Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned food in the Bible is bread. The term refers in a general sense to all foods but more particularly to food prepared from grain. In biblical times bread was prepared from several grains. Wheat, barley, and spelt were grown in Egypt (Ex 9:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>An Egyptian physician named Sinuhe, living in the mid-20th century <span>BC<\/span>, recorded that bread was baked daily in Palestine and Syria, and it is probable that it was served with every meal. This bread was probably a wafer or flat cake made from barley or emmer (an inferior form of wheat), since these were the two grain crops that Sinuhe mentioned seeing. Wheat was the most expensive grain. Fine wheat flour was a luxury only the rich could afford (Gn 18:6; Ez 16:13, 19). In later periods wheat became a valuable export crop that was shipped from Tyre to other ports in the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>Because barley could grow in less productive soil and was more tolerant of drought conditions, it became a popular grain crop in the ancient Near East. Barley could also be harvested several weeks earlier than wheat. Barley bread (Jgs 7:13; 2 Kgs 4:42) and barley cakes (Ez 4:12) were eaten by the average laborer. Jesus miraculously multiplied a young boy’s five barley loaves and two fishes and fed five thousand (Jn 6:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Millet, a cereal with a small grain head growing on a stalk less than two feet (.6 meter) high, and spelt, a type of wheat, were also used in times of need as a border around the edges of fields.<\/p>\n<p>The most primitive way of processing grain was to rub the ears between the hands to separate the kernels, as Jesus and his disciples did (Lk 6:1). To perform this act on the Sabbath (the day of rest) was considered the equivalent of reaping and was therefore forbidden.<\/p>\n<p>Parching (roasting the grain lightly in a pan) was another simple method of preparation (Jos 5:11; 1 Sm 17:17). It formed a quick and easy meal for laborers or kings (Ru 2:14; 1 Sm 25:18; 2 Sm 17:28). Parched corn was ideal for taking on journeys.<\/p>\n<p>Bread making was a strenuous task. Mortars, pestles, and simple mills with upper and lower stones were used for grinding flour in ancient Egypt around 2900 <span>BC<\/span>. These primitive mills were normally placed on the ground, and one was compelled to kneel in order to do the backbreaking work. The resulting meal was coarse and filled with small pieces of husk.<\/p>\n<p>When the flour had been prepared, water was added and the mixture was kneaded in a special trough. The dough could then be made immediately into cakes, pancakes, or unleavened bread (Gn 19:3). These flat cakes or wafers were often baked on previously heated stones, on the inner walls of small conical ovens, or in larger communal ovens. Leaven was added to make a lighter dough. The leaven was normally a piece of dough left over from an earlier mixing and allowed to ferment before being used. The flour meal was also mixed with a porridge made of lentil beans in order to stretch the food supply.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AnimalProducts\">Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>The introduction of meat as part of the diet seems to have coincided with the time when Noah and his family left the ark (Gn 9:3). After this time, however, the animals normally eaten for food were so valuable that only the wealthy could afford to slaughter them. So in biblical times the peasant had a simple, somewhat monotonous diet, while the rich feasted on meat, delicacies, and imported commodities. As a result, meat was a luxury item that the poor would rarely enjoy except on such occasions as the Passover celebration or sacrifices in which the worshiper ate part of the offering (Ex 12:8). Although it was clearly uneconomic to slaughter an animal that produced such staples as milk, curds, and cheese, the rules of hospitality in the Near East dictated that an animal should be killed to entertain an honored guest (2 Sm 12:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>Domestic sheep, goats, and oxen provided the main source of meat, although venison was popular with the upper classes. When the blind Isaac was deceived by his son Jacob, the father was offered the luxury of both kid’s meat and wild game (Gn 27:3, 9, 19). The ox kept in a stall or the fatted calf were reserved for occasions of great festivity (Mt 22:4).<\/p>\n<p>The use of meat for sacrifice was given definitive form in the provisions of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The Law forbade anyone to slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day (Lv 22:28). Another prohibition, perhaps directed at pagan Canaanite sacrificial rituals, would not allow a kid to be stewed or poached in its mother’s milk (Dt 14:21). Mosaic law was emphatic in prohibiting the consumption of blood in any form. Animal blood was considered the source of the animal’s life and was offered by priests as a sacrifice to God to atone for human sin (Lv 17:11). In the Mosaic law, pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits were considered unclean and were therefore forbidden for food, principally on hygienic grounds (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient world, meat was usually boiled or stewed. Roasting an ox or a kid would usually occur only as part of a special feast or sacrificial ritual. Animals might also be roasted for members of the royal palace or for a king’s special guests.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the fact that hunting was enjoyed by all who were able to participate, wild game provided only a minor part of the diet. Among the game found in Palestine and mentioned in the Bible are gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, and deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23). It is probable that pheasants were available, and there were certainly turtledoves, pigeons, quails, and partridges, although the precise quantities of food that these birds provided is not certain (Gn 15:9; Ex 16:13). Goose was the most popular dish in Egypt, and marsh ducks were also highly esteemed as game. After the Persian period, chickens were eaten (2 Esd 1:30), and eggs and omelettes were popular in Rome in early Christian times. The eggs mentioned in Deuteronomy are probably wild birds’ eggs (Dt 22:6-7; cf. Is 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>Thirty varieties of fish were available in the Jordan, and an extensive fishing industry existed on the shores of the Sea of Galilee at the time of Christ. Supplies of fish were readily available from the Mediterranean coast during the Roman period, but at an earlier time the fish supply depended to a large extent upon whichever nation had control of the coastline. In the postexilic period the people of Tyre supplied the city of Jerusalem with fish, which were sold near the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3). In the regulations concerning the types of fish suitable for food, only those that had fins and scales were acceptable (Lv 11:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many of the distinctions concerning food were eliminated. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, challenging the Pharisees’ hypocrisy, upset the Jewish food laws by saying that evil thoughts, not certain foods, make a person unclean (Mk 7:19). As Christianity spread into gentile areas, there was, however, a continuing concern about eating meat that had been offered to idols. The question came to a head in Corinth. The apostle Paul maintained that though the meat was acceptable, one should take care not to cause spiritual damage to another Christian with a more sensitive conscience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InsectsandTheirFoodProducts\">Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>Wild honey was found in Palestine, but there is no evidence of bee-keeping. Egyptians, however, did practice beekeeping at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The honeycomb is mentioned specifically in 1 Samuel 14:27 and Song of Songs 5:1; liquid honey is referred to in 1 Kings 14:3. Honey was to be found in crevices of rocks and on trees (Dt 32:13). It was the primary sweetener in cooking. Although it could not be used in a sacrifice to the Lord (Lv 2:11), honey was prized as a delicacy. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, when Thutmose III was campaigning in Syria and Palestine, he brought back vast quantities of honey as tribute from his newly conquered lands.<\/p>\n<p>Locusts were probably first eaten in desperation after they had devastated crops. They are one of the few insects mentioned as a permissible source of food (Lv 11:22). Locusts were fried in flour or honey, or were preserved by being dried. Locusts and wild honey formed John the Baptist’s basic diet in the wilderness (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6). Although locusts contain little protein, they are rich in fat and have some mineral content.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"VegetablesandSeasoning\">Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew people wandering in the Sinai wilderness bemoaned the loss of the flavorful vegetables they had become accustomed to during their Egyptian captivity. In particular, they expressed a longing for cucumbers, melons (possibly watermelons), leeks, onions, and garlic (Nm 11:5). Many of these vegetables were later grown in Palestine (particularly in the Gaza). When cucumbers were first cultivated, they were regarded as luxury items and had to be protected by guards who lived in shacks overlooking the gardens (Is 1:8). Beans, lentils, and parched grain were among the items brought to David and his soldiers at Mahanaim (2 Sm 17:28). Lentils were known in Egypt from at least the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> and were used extensively both then and in later times by the Israelites. Lentil soup is mentioned in Genesis 25:34.<\/p>\n<p>In times of hunger the husks of the carob tree, normally fed to cattle, could be used for food. These would have been most acceptable to the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). There were many kinds of green herbs that could provide a meal for the poor in time of need (Prv 15:17). In cases of extreme hunger, some kinds of mallow and juniper roots could also be used as food. In Elisha’s time a group of prophets at Gilgal prepared a stew of wild vegetables, to which they mistakenly added poisonous wild gourds. Elisha rectified the situation by adding meal to the pot (2 Kgs 4:38-41). While there is no actual record of the kinds of bitter herbs used as part of the Passover offering (Ex 12:8; Nm 9:11), mint and cummin were most probably included. Dill, cummin, rue, and mint were common garden herbs (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>Seasonings were welcome additives to the rather bland character of typical Israelite fare. Salt came mainly from the Dead Sea area and was essential as a seasoning and preserving agent. Salt was so important in the diet that it became part of the vocabulary of moral obligation. The sharing of salt with a person at a meal sealed a covenant or pact (Nm 18:19). In the Levitical sacrificial ritual, salt was part of meat and cereal offerings, since it signified the sealing of God’s covenant with Israel (Lv 2:13; Ez 43:24).<\/p>\n<p>The mustard tree, which was probably grown for its oil content, grew from a minute seed to the height of 15 feet (4.5 meters) (Mt 13:31-32). Anise, coriander, and cinnamon were also available (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7). Perhaps the most popular and widely used spice, apart from salt, was garlic. Vinegar was also probably used as a flavoring agent and a preservative. From the number of seeds and plants found in Egyptian tombs from the 18th dynasty, it is obvious that the use of seasoning was widespread in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitsNutsandWine\">Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p>Olive trees grew abundantly in Palestine and were an excellent source of food and oil. Even in poor soil, one tree could sufficiently supply a family for a whole year. Some green olives were pickled in brine and eaten with bread, but the olive was most important as a source of oil. Olive oil was used in baking bread and cakes and in frying foods. The best quality olive oil was used in the temple sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was extracted from olives by a simple process: for the finest quality oil, olives were picked before fully ripe and then crushed by hand with a stone mortar and pestle. Usually, however, pickers beat the olives from trees with long poles and collected them in baskets. The oil was then trodden out, probably in the same vat used for grapes (Mi 6:15), which were harvested approximately four weeks later.<\/p>\n<p>An oil mill was developed subsequently, and the heavy upper grinding stone was turned by two people. As the oil dripped through, it was collected in another stone vat and was allowed to settle and purify. When refined, the oil was stored in skins or jars.<\/p>\n<p>Fig trees grew in all areas of Palestine. They required little attention and provided two or three crops per year. The most abundant of these was the second, which ripened in late summer. The first figs of the season were considered a great delicacy (Is 28:4; Mi 7:1). The prophet Hosea suggested that the Israelites were like the firstfruits of the fig tree (Hos 9:10). Another prophet, Jeremiah, spoke of those who had gone into exile as being like the first figs, while those who were left behind were the bad figs, fit only for destruction (Jer 24:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Figs were usually eaten fresh from the trees, but some were pressed into cakes to use when traveling (1 Sm 25:18; 30:12; 1 Chr 12:40). Figs were also valuable for medicinal purposes, since effective poultices could be made from them (2 Kgs 20:7; Is 38:21). Sycamore trees produced small, figlike fruit eaten primarily by the poor. A short time before harvest, the fruit was slightly incised, making it swell and ripen more quickly. The prophet Amos notched sycamore fruit before he was called by God (Am 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Fruit from the date palm could also have been pressed into flat cakes for travelers, as figs were. The Bible, however, makes no specific reference to its fruit as food (see Jgs 4:5; Ps 92:12; Jl 1:12; Jn 12:13).<\/p>\n<p>Another popular Near Eastern fruit was the red pomegranate. It was eaten whole, or the seeds were pressed to provide a refreshing drink. The pomegranate is mentioned in temple ritual as one of the fruits brought back from Canaan to Moses by his spies (Ex 28:33) and as an exotic drink (Sg 8:2). The “apple” mentioned in Scripture (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:5) was most likely a type of apricot or quince, not an apple as we know it today. Nuts were used for additional flavor in cooking. Almonds and pistachio nuts were among the gifts sent by Jacob to ransom his sons (Gn 43:11).<\/p>\n<p>Grapes were popular and plentiful from the early Bronze Age. In addition to being eaten fresh from the vine, grapes were dried as raisins (Nm 6:3; 1 Sm 25:18) or pressed, their juice drunk either as new wine or fermented into an alcoholic drink. One of the duties of the cup-bearer in ancient royal courts was to provide grape juice or wine for the king, his family, and guests (Gn 40:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>The juice of grapes also provided vinegar when wine deteriorated. Vinegar was used as a flavoring agent in cooking and as a preservative. When diluted with water, it supplied a refreshing drink for workers in the fields. A type of jelly was made in the Near East by boiling grapes until they assumed the consistency of molasses. This syrup could also be used as a sweetening agent in cooking.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was the universal drink in antiquity. It could be diluted with water or mixed with spices or honey to make a mulled wine (Sg 8:2; Is 5:22). The Hebrew word for “banquet” or “feast” literally means “drinking,” which reveals much of the character of such occasions. A certain amount of merriment was considered proper at a festival or banquet (Gn 43:34; Jgs 9:13; Lk 5:34).<\/p>\n<p>Wine making was similar in many respects to the production of olive oil. Clusters of grapes were cut from the vine with a sickle, collected in baskets, and taken to the winepress, where they were trodden by men and women. The juice ran into a lower vat, where, under the hot sun, fermentation began almost immediately. The wine was left to settle so that any twigs or skins would form a sediment; after that the wine could be strained off. In about six weeks the wine was ready to drink or store in earthenware jars or wineskins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals; Bread; Family Life and Relations; Leaven; Meals, Significance of; Plants; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION<\/h3>\n<p>Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare with neighboring nations (2 Kgs 6:25), and intermittent plagues of locusts ravaged large areas.<\/p>\n<p>Food was more plentiful in Palestine (described as a “land flowing with milk and honey”) than in many other parts of the Near East. Shallow cultivation of the soil, however, made crops highly reliant on regular rainfall. Egyptian crops were far less susceptible to weather variations, because the Nile provided a dependable source of water.<\/p>\n<p>Food shortages were considered warnings or punishment from God (Lam 4:9, 11; Am 4:6-9) to teach the Hebrews that life is more than food and that faith must continue despite scarcity, famine, or even death (Dt 8:3; Hb 3:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The staples of nomadic Hebrews were milk, curds, and cheese. As the people became more stationary, they grew grains and vegetables and planted orchards and vineyards. Grain would sometimes be grown for a season, and then after the harvest, the tribes would move their flocks to other pastures and find other arable land. Religious sacrifices and festivals were times not only of solemnity but also of rejoicing and great feasting. Victories were also celebrated with banquets and feasting on the food obtained from the camp of the vanquished enemy.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>• Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>• Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>• Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>• Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>• Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DairyProducts\">Dairy Products<\/p>\n<p>Milk and its by-products formed a vital part of the Hebrew diet (see Jgs 4:19). Goat’s milk was most frequently used, although milk from camels, cows, and sheep was also available (Gn 32:15; Dt 32:14; Prv 27:27).<\/p>\n<p>Since fresh milk could not be preserved in Palestine’s hot climate, it was processed into buttermilk, curds, and cheese. Milk was poured into goatskins, where it soured and thickened because of the nonsterile condition of the previously used skins and the movement as it was transported. That movement of the pouch (often made from a cow’s stomach, containing the enzyme rennin used in cheese making) produced curds. Curds are first mentioned in the Bible as part of the meal that Abraham provided for his extraordinary guests (Gn 18:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for curds <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">chena<\/span><em>)<\/em> is also translated “butter” (Jb 10:10). This butter would be similar in consistency to yogurt from which the water has been squeezed out. When pressed and rolled into small balls, it kept indefinitely, despite the climate. Thus, compressed curds were particularly valuable for journeys in arid regions where food was scarce.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GrainCrops\">Grain Crops<\/p>\n<p>The most frequently mentioned food in the Bible is bread. The term refers in a general sense to all foods but more particularly to food prepared from grain. In biblical times bread was prepared from several grains. Wheat, barley, and spelt were grown in Egypt (Ex 9:31-32).<\/p>\n<p>An Egyptian physician named Sinuhe, living in the mid-20th century <span>BC<\/span>, recorded that bread was baked daily in Palestine and Syria, and it is probable that it was served with every meal. This bread was probably a wafer or flat cake made from barley or emmer (an inferior form of wheat), since these were the two grain crops that Sinuhe mentioned seeing. Wheat was the most expensive grain. Fine wheat flour was a luxury only the rich could afford (Gn 18:6; Ez 16:13, 19). In later periods wheat became a valuable export crop that was shipped from Tyre to other ports in the Mediterranean.<\/p>\n<p>Because barley could grow in less productive soil and was more tolerant of drought conditions, it became a popular grain crop in the ancient Near East. Barley could also be harvested several weeks earlier than wheat. Barley bread (Jgs 7:13; 2 Kgs 4:42) and barley cakes (Ez 4:12) were eaten by the average laborer. Jesus miraculously multiplied a young boy’s five barley loaves and two fishes and fed five thousand (Jn 6:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>Millet, a cereal with a small grain head growing on a stalk less than two feet (.6 meter) high, and spelt, a type of wheat, were also used in times of need as a border around the edges of fields.<\/p>\n<p>The most primitive way of processing grain was to rub the ears between the hands to separate the kernels, as Jesus and his disciples did (Lk 6:1). To perform this act on the Sabbath (the day of rest) was considered the equivalent of reaping and was therefore forbidden.<\/p>\n<p>Parching (roasting the grain lightly in a pan) was another simple method of preparation (Jos 5:11; 1 Sm 17:17). It formed a quick and easy meal for laborers or kings (Ru 2:14; 1 Sm 25:18; 2 Sm 17:28). Parched corn was ideal for taking on journeys.<\/p>\n<p>Bread making was a strenuous task. Mortars, pestles, and simple mills with upper and lower stones were used for grinding flour in ancient Egypt around 2900 <span>BC<\/span>. These primitive mills were normally placed on the ground, and one was compelled to kneel in order to do the backbreaking work. The resulting meal was coarse and filled with small pieces of husk.<\/p>\n<p>When the flour had been prepared, water was added and the mixture was kneaded in a special trough. The dough could then be made immediately into cakes, pancakes, or unleavened bread (Gn 19:3). These flat cakes or wafers were often baked on previously heated stones, on the inner walls of small conical ovens, or in larger communal ovens. Leaven was added to make a lighter dough. The leaven was normally a piece of dough left over from an earlier mixing and allowed to ferment before being used. The flour meal was also mixed with a porridge made of lentil beans in order to stretch the food supply.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AnimalProducts\">Animal Products<\/p>\n<p>The introduction of meat as part of the diet seems to have coincided with the time when Noah and his family left the ark (Gn 9:3). After this time, however, the animals normally eaten for food were so valuable that only the wealthy could afford to slaughter them. So in biblical times the peasant had a simple, somewhat monotonous diet, while the rich feasted on meat, delicacies, and imported commodities. As a result, meat was a luxury item that the poor would rarely enjoy except on such occasions as the Passover celebration or sacrifices in which the worshiper ate part of the offering (Ex 12:8). Although it was clearly uneconomic to slaughter an animal that produced such staples as milk, curds, and cheese, the rules of hospitality in the Near East dictated that an animal should be killed to entertain an honored guest (2 Sm 12:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>Domestic sheep, goats, and oxen provided the main source of meat, although venison was popular with the upper classes. When the blind Isaac was deceived by his son Jacob, the father was offered the luxury of both kid’s meat and wild game (Gn 27:3, 9, 19). The ox kept in a stall or the fatted calf were reserved for occasions of great festivity (Mt 22:4).<\/p>\n<p>The use of meat for sacrifice was given definitive form in the provisions of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. The Law forbade anyone to slaughter an animal and its offspring on the same day (Lv 22:28). Another prohibition, perhaps directed at pagan Canaanite sacrificial rituals, would not allow a kid to be stewed or poached in its mother’s milk (Dt 14:21). Mosaic law was emphatic in prohibiting the consumption of blood in any form. Animal blood was considered the source of the animal’s life and was offered by priests as a sacrifice to God to atone for human sin (Lv 17:11). In the Mosaic law, pigs, camels, badgers, and rabbits were considered unclean and were therefore forbidden for food, principally on hygienic grounds (11:4-8).<\/p>\n<p>In the ancient world, meat was usually boiled or stewed. Roasting an ox or a kid would usually occur only as part of a special feast or sacrificial ritual. Animals might also be roasted for members of the royal palace or for a king’s special guests.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the fact that hunting was enjoyed by all who were able to participate, wild game provided only a minor part of the diet. Among the game found in Palestine and mentioned in the Bible are gazelle, roebuck, wild goat, and deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23). It is probable that pheasants were available, and there were certainly turtledoves, pigeons, quails, and partridges, although the precise quantities of food that these birds provided is not certain (Gn 15:9; Ex 16:13). Goose was the most popular dish in Egypt, and marsh ducks were also highly esteemed as game. After the Persian period, chickens were eaten (2 Esd 1:30), and eggs and omelettes were popular in Rome in early Christian times. The eggs mentioned in Deuteronomy are probably wild birds’ eggs (Dt 22:6-7; cf. Is 10:14).<\/p>\n<p>Thirty varieties of fish were available in the Jordan, and an extensive fishing industry existed on the shores of the Sea of Galilee at the time of Christ. Supplies of fish were readily available from the Mediterranean coast during the Roman period, but at an earlier time the fish supply depended to a large extent upon whichever nation had control of the coastline. In the postexilic period the people of Tyre supplied the city of Jerusalem with fish, which were sold near the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3). In the regulations concerning the types of fish suitable for food, only those that had fins and scales were acceptable (Lv 11:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times many of the distinctions concerning food were eliminated. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus, challenging the Pharisees’ hypocrisy, upset the Jewish food laws by saying that evil thoughts, not certain foods, make a person unclean (Mk 7:19). As Christianity spread into gentile areas, there was, however, a continuing concern about eating meat that had been offered to idols. The question came to a head in Corinth. The apostle Paul maintained that though the meat was acceptable, one should take care not to cause spiritual damage to another Christian with a more sensitive conscience.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InsectsandTheirFoodProducts\">Insects and Their Food Products<\/p>\n<p>Wild honey was found in Palestine, but there is no evidence of bee-keeping. Egyptians, however, did practice beekeeping at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The honeycomb is mentioned specifically in 1 Samuel 14:27 and Song of Songs 5:1; liquid honey is referred to in 1 Kings 14:3. Honey was to be found in crevices of rocks and on trees (Dt 32:13). It was the primary sweetener in cooking. Although it could not be used in a sacrifice to the Lord (Lv 2:11), honey was prized as a delicacy. In the 15th century <span>BC<\/span>, when Thutmose III was campaigning in Syria and Palestine, he brought back vast quantities of honey as tribute from his newly conquered lands.<\/p>\n<p>Locusts were probably first eaten in desperation after they had devastated crops. They are one of the few insects mentioned as a permissible source of food (Lv 11:22). Locusts were fried in flour or honey, or were preserved by being dried. Locusts and wild honey formed John the Baptist’s basic diet in the wilderness (Mt 3:4; Mk 1:6). Although locusts contain little protein, they are rich in fat and have some mineral content.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"VegetablesandSeasoning\">Vegetables and Seasoning<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew people wandering in the Sinai wilderness bemoaned the loss of the flavorful vegetables they had become accustomed to during their Egyptian captivity. In particular, they expressed a longing for cucumbers, melons (possibly watermelons), leeks, onions, and garlic (Nm 11:5). Many of these vegetables were later grown in Palestine (particularly in the Gaza). When cucumbers were first cultivated, they were regarded as luxury items and had to be protected by guards who lived in shacks overlooking the gardens (Is 1:8). Beans, lentils, and parched grain were among the items brought to David and his soldiers at Mahanaim (2 Sm 17:28). Lentils were known in Egypt from at least the 13th century <span>BC<\/span> and were used extensively both then and in later times by the Israelites. Lentil soup is mentioned in Genesis 25:34.<\/p>\n<p>In times of hunger the husks of the carob tree, normally fed to cattle, could be used for food. These would have been most acceptable to the prodigal son (Lk 15:16). There were many kinds of green herbs that could provide a meal for the poor in time of need (Prv 15:17). In cases of extreme hunger, some kinds of mallow and juniper roots could also be used as food. In Elisha’s time a group of prophets at Gilgal prepared a stew of wild vegetables, to which they mistakenly added poisonous wild gourds. Elisha rectified the situation by adding meal to the pot (2 Kgs 4:38-41). While there is no actual record of the kinds of bitter herbs used as part of the Passover offering (Ex 12:8; Nm 9:11), mint and cummin were most probably included. Dill, cummin, rue, and mint were common garden herbs (Mt 23:23; Lk 11:42).<\/p>\n<p>Seasonings were welcome additives to the rather bland character of typical Israelite fare. Salt came mainly from the Dead Sea area and was essential as a seasoning and preserving agent. Salt was so important in the diet that it became part of the vocabulary of moral obligation. The sharing of salt with a person at a meal sealed a covenant or pact (Nm 18:19). In the Levitical sacrificial ritual, salt was part of meat and cereal offerings, since it signified the sealing of God’s covenant with Israel (Lv 2:13; Ez 43:24).<\/p>\n<p>The mustard tree, which was probably grown for its oil content, grew from a minute seed to the height of 15 feet (4.5 meters) (Mt 13:31-32). Anise, coriander, and cinnamon were also available (Ex 16:31; Nm 11:7). Perhaps the most popular and widely used spice, apart from salt, was garlic. Vinegar was also probably used as a flavoring agent and a preservative. From the number of seeds and plants found in Egyptian tombs from the 18th dynasty, it is obvious that the use of seasoning was widespread in antiquity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FruitsNutsandWine\">Fruits, Nuts, and Wine<\/p>\n<p>Olive trees grew abundantly in Palestine and were an excellent source of food and oil. Even in poor soil, one tree could sufficiently supply a family for a whole year. Some green olives were pickled in brine and eaten with bread, but the olive was most important as a source of oil. Olive oil was used in baking bread and cakes and in frying foods. The best quality olive oil was used in the temple sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>Oil was extracted from olives by a simple process: for the finest quality oil, olives were picked before fully ripe and then crushed by hand with a stone mortar and pestle. Usually, however, pickers beat the olives from trees with long poles and collected them in baskets. The oil was then trodden out, probably in the same vat used for grapes (Mi 6:15), which were harvested approximately four weeks later.<\/p>\n<p>An oil mill was developed subsequently, and the heavy upper grinding stone was turned by two people. As the oil dripped through, it was collected in another stone vat and was allowed to settle and purify. When refined, the oil was stored in skins or jars.<\/p>\n<p>Fig trees grew in all areas of Palestine. They required little attention and provided two or three crops per year. The most abundant of these was the second, which ripened in late summer. The first figs of the season were considered a great delicacy (Is 28:4; Mi 7:1). The prophet Hosea suggested that the Israelites were like the firstfruits of the fig tree (Hos 9:10). Another prophet, Jeremiah, spoke of those who had gone into exile as being like the first figs, while those who were left behind were the bad figs, fit only for destruction (Jer 24:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Figs were usually eaten fresh from the trees, but some were pressed into cakes to use when traveling (1 Sm 25:18; 30:12; 1 Chr 12:40). Figs were also valuable for medicinal purposes, since effective poultices could be made from them (2 Kgs 20:7; Is 38:21). Sycamore trees produced small, figlike fruit eaten primarily by the poor. A short time before harvest, the fruit was slightly incised, making it swell and ripen more quickly. The prophet Amos notched sycamore fruit before he was called by God (Am 7:14).<\/p>\n<p>Fruit from the date palm could also have been pressed into flat cakes for travelers, as figs were. The Bible, however, makes no specific reference to its fruit as food (see Jgs 4:5; Ps 92:12; Jl 1:12; Jn 12:13).<\/p>\n<p>Another popular Near Eastern fruit was the red pomegranate. It was eaten whole, or the seeds were pressed to provide a refreshing drink. The pomegranate is mentioned in temple ritual as one of the fruits brought back from Canaan to Moses by his spies (Ex 28:33) and as an exotic drink (Sg 8:2). The “apple” mentioned in Scripture (Prv 25:11; Sg 2:5) was most likely a type of apricot or quince, not an apple as we know it today. Nuts were used for additional flavor in cooking. Almonds and pistachio nuts were among the gifts sent by Jacob to ransom his sons (Gn 43:11).<\/p>\n<p>Grapes were popular and plentiful from the early Bronze Age. In addition to being eaten fresh from the vine, grapes were dried as raisins (Nm 6:3; 1 Sm 25:18) or pressed, their juice drunk either as new wine or fermented into an alcoholic drink. One of the duties of the cup-bearer in ancient royal courts was to provide grape juice or wine for the king, his family, and guests (Gn 40:9-13).<\/p>\n<p>The juice of grapes also provided vinegar when wine deteriorated. Vinegar was used as a flavoring agent in cooking and as a preservative. When diluted with water, it supplied a refreshing drink for workers in the fields. A type of jelly was made in the Near East by boiling grapes until they assumed the consistency of molasses. This syrup could also be used as a sweetening agent in cooking.<\/p>\n<p>Wine was the universal drink in antiquity. It could be diluted with water or mixed with spices or honey to make a mulled wine (Sg 8:2; Is 5:22). The Hebrew word for “banquet” or “feast” literally means “drinking,” which reveals much of the character of such occasions. A certain amount of merriment was considered proper at a festival or banquet (Gn 43:34; Jgs 9:13; Lk 5:34).<\/p>\n<p>Wine making was similar in many respects to the production of olive oil. Clusters of grapes were cut from the vine with a sickle, collected in baskets, and taken to the winepress, where they were trodden by men and women. The juice ran into a lower vat, where, under the hot sun, fermentation began almost immediately. The wine was left to settle so that any twigs or skins would form a sediment; after that the wine could be strained off. In about six weeks the wine was ready to drink or store in earthenware jars or wineskins.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Animals; Bread; Family Life and Relations; Leaven; Meals, Significance of; Plants; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare ...","summary_en":"FOOD AND FOOD PREPARATION Substances required by the body to sustain life, and the methods of making them edible. Food consumed in Bible times included bread, milk products, fruit, meat, and fish. Food was also offered sacrificially or given as gifts. The availability of food was a perpetual concern because of the recurrent scarcity: droughts were frequent (2 Kgs 4:38; Jer 14:1, 4-6; Hg 1:11), hailstorms wrought devastation among crops (Hg 2:17), farming was frequently interrupted by warfare ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":35490,"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":55300,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:20","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","summary_en":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82926,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:20","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","summary_en":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110552,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:20","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","summary_en":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138178,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:20","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:20-22<\/strong> These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","summary_en":"7:20-22 These verses summarize thirteen things that truly defile a person. These actions and vices all come from the heart.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":12771,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fornication*","title_en":"Fornication*","content_ro":"<h3>FORNICATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Unchastity, sexual immorality. The word “fornication” is used in the Scriptures to mean several different things.<\/p>\n<p>Its general meaning refers to every kind of illegal sexual intercourse, that is, any intercourse except that between a husband and wife. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (<span>kjv<\/span>) the word is used twice to refer to a sin that was being tolerated by the church: a man apparently was cohabitating with his stepmother. In a list of terrible sins in Romans 1:29, the apostle Paul included fornication, apparently intending the term to mean all acts of sexual immorality (<span>kjv<\/span>). In 1 Corinthians the context suggests that Paul used the word in reference to all sorts of illicit sexual activity (6:13, 18). In 1 Corinthians 7:2 (<span>kjv<\/span>) Paul used the plural Greek word for “fornications” to imply the various ways in which the sin may manifest itself. He thus gave a reason why people in Corinth should marry and live together properly. One of the sins included in the word’s general sense is adultery.<\/p>\n<p>“Fornication” also has a more limited sense of immoral sexual activity between unmarried people. Such a meaning is implied in those biblical lists where both fornication and adultery come together. Jesus’ list of the defiling sins that proceed out of a person’s heart includes “fornication” and “adultery” (Mt 15:19; Mk 7:21). Paul’s list of those sinners who will not inherit the kingdom of God also contains both fornicators and adulterers (1 Cor 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Fornication” in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 (as translated by the <span>kjv<\/span>) is usually taken by biblical students today to refer specifically to adultery (see <span>nlt<\/span>). The translation of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">porneia<\/span> has to do with interpretation rather than translation. Scholars disagree as to whether Jesus’ exceptive phrase relative to divorce has to do with fornication in a general or limited sense. He might have meant adultery alone, or he might have been including it generally with other sexual sins.<\/p>\n<p>A figurative use of the word “fornication” appears in both the OT and NT. Originating in descriptions of Israel and the church as the Lord’s wife or the bride, apostasy from God and idolatry are called fornication (see, e.g., Jer 2). Ezekiel 16 uses unfaithfulness to marriage vows as a symbol of Jerusalem’s wayward relationship with God. Jerusalem had become an “unfaithful wife” to him. The first three chapters of Hosea use the relationship of the prophet Hosea and his unfaithful wife, Gomer, as an illustration of how the nation of Israel had become guilty of fornication against its “husband,” the Lord, by going after other gods. In the book of Revelation the figurative use of “fornication” and “impure passion” is ascribed to Babylon the great, the mother of harlots (Rv 14:8; 17:2-4; 18:3; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORNICATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Unchastity, sexual immorality. The word “fornication” is used in the Scriptures to mean several different things.<\/p>\n<p>Its general meaning refers to every kind of illegal sexual intercourse, that is, any intercourse except that between a husband and wife. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (<span>kjv<\/span>) the word is used twice to refer to a sin that was being tolerated by the church: a man apparently was cohabitating with his stepmother. In a list of terrible sins in Romans 1:29, the apostle Paul included fornication, apparently intending the term to mean all acts of sexual immorality (<span>kjv<\/span>). In 1 Corinthians the context suggests that Paul used the word in reference to all sorts of illicit sexual activity (6:13, 18). In 1 Corinthians 7:2 (<span>kjv<\/span>) Paul used the plural Greek word for “fornications” to imply the various ways in which the sin may manifest itself. He thus gave a reason why people in Corinth should marry and live together properly. One of the sins included in the word’s general sense is adultery.<\/p>\n<p>“Fornication” also has a more limited sense of immoral sexual activity between unmarried people. Such a meaning is implied in those biblical lists where both fornication and adultery come together. Jesus’ list of the defiling sins that proceed out of a person’s heart includes “fornication” and “adultery” (Mt 15:19; Mk 7:21). Paul’s list of those sinners who will not inherit the kingdom of God also contains both fornicators and adulterers (1 Cor 6:9, <span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Fornication” in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 (as translated by the <span>kjv<\/span>) is usually taken by biblical students today to refer specifically to adultery (see <span>nlt<\/span>). The translation of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">porneia<\/span> has to do with interpretation rather than translation. Scholars disagree as to whether Jesus’ exceptive phrase relative to divorce has to do with fornication in a general or limited sense. He might have meant adultery alone, or he might have been including it generally with other sexual sins.<\/p>\n<p>A figurative use of the word “fornication” appears in both the OT and NT. Originating in descriptions of Israel and the church as the Lord’s wife or the bride, apostasy from God and idolatry are called fornication (see, e.g., Jer 2). Ezekiel 16 uses unfaithfulness to marriage vows as a symbol of Jerusalem’s wayward relationship with God. Jerusalem had become an “unfaithful wife” to him. The first three chapters of Hosea use the relationship of the prophet Hosea and his unfaithful wife, Gomer, as an illustration of how the nation of Israel had become guilty of fornication against its “husband,” the Lord, by going after other gods. In the book of Revelation the figurative use of “fornication” and “impure passion” is ascribed to Babylon the great, the mother of harlots (Rv 14:8; 17:2-4; 18:3; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adultery.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORNICATION* Unchastity, sexual immorality. The word “fornication” is used in the Scriptures to mean several different things. Its general meaning refers to every kind of illegal sexual intercourse, that is, any intercourse except that between a husband and wife. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (kjv) the word is used twice to refer to a sin that was being tolerated by the church: a man apparently was cohabitating with his stepmother. In a list of terrible sins in Romans 1:29, the apostle Pa...","summary_en":"FORNICATION* Unchastity, sexual immorality. The word “fornication” is used in the Scriptures to mean several different things. Its general meaning refers to every kind of illegal sexual intercourse, that is, any intercourse except that between a husband and wife. For example, in 1 Corinthians 5:1 (kjv) the word is used twice to refer to a sin that was being tolerated by the church: a man apparently was cohabitating with his stepmother. In a list of terrible sins in Romans 1:29, the apostle Pa...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":22558,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lasciviousness*","title_en":"Lasciviousness*","content_ro":"<h3>LASCIVIOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Extreme indulgence in sensual pleasures. Modern Bible translations commonly use the words “licentiousness,” “debauchery,” or “sensuality” instead. Lasciviousness occurs when the pursuit of pleasure is carried to the extreme of complete disregard for the integrity of others and for the environment.<\/p>\n<p>Among biblical examples of lasciviousness are the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, who filled their lives with lawless deeds (2 Pt 2:7); the false teachers, who promised freedom but were themselves slaves of corruption (2 Pt 2:2, 18-19; compare Jude 4); and the Gentiles, who were greedy to practice every kind of uncleanness (Eph 4:19). The apostle Paul used “lasciviousness” to refer to sexual excesses (Rom 13:13; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19), which is likely the word’s sense in Mark 7:22.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LASCIVIOUSNESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Extreme indulgence in sensual pleasures. Modern Bible translations commonly use the words “licentiousness,” “debauchery,” or “sensuality” instead. Lasciviousness occurs when the pursuit of pleasure is carried to the extreme of complete disregard for the integrity of others and for the environment.<\/p>\n<p>Among biblical examples of lasciviousness are the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, who filled their lives with lawless deeds (2 Pt 2:7); the false teachers, who promised freedom but were themselves slaves of corruption (2 Pt 2:2, 18-19; compare Jude 4); and the Gentiles, who were greedy to practice every kind of uncleanness (Eph 4:19). The apostle Paul used “lasciviousness” to refer to sexual excesses (Rom 13:13; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19), which is likely the word’s sense in Mark 7:22.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LASCIVIOUSNESS* Extreme indulgence in sensual pleasures. Modern Bible translations commonly use the words “licentiousness,” “debauchery,” or “sensuality” instead. Lasciviousness occurs when the pursuit of pleasure is carried to the extreme of complete disregard for the integrity of others and for the environment. Among biblical examples of lasciviousness are the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, who filled their lives with lawless deeds (2 Pt 2:7); the false teachers, who promised freedom but wer...","summary_en":"LASCIVIOUSNESS* Extreme indulgence in sensual pleasures. Modern Bible translations commonly use the words “licentiousness,” “debauchery,” or “sensuality” instead. Lasciviousness occurs when the pursuit of pleasure is carried to the extreme of complete disregard for the integrity of others and for the environment. Among biblical examples of lasciviousness are the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, who filled their lives with lawless deeds (2 Pt 2:7); the false teachers, who promised freedom but wer...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":6035,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Canaanite Canaan","title_en":"Canaanite Canaan","content_ro":"<h3>CANAAN, CANAANITE<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Land and People<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Literature<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandPeople\">Land and People<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” (Gn 10:15-19), Noah’s grandson Canaan was progenitor of 11 groups that lived in the area of Syria and Palestine. The first six evidently occupied territory at or south of Sidon, whereas the others lived farther north. The northerners mostly settled on the edge of the coastal plain; in the south, settlement spread eastward to the upland areas. OT references specifically placed the Canaanites in western Palestine’s valleys and coastal areas; the upland country was occupied by Amorites and other peoples (Nm 13:29; Jos 5:1; 7:9; Jgs 1:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest known references to the people of Canaan is in a tablet from Mari (15th century <span>BC<\/span>), in which a military officer reported his surveillance of “thieves and Canaanites.” The Canaanites were listed as a group on the Memphis Stele (inscribed column) of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenophis II (c. 1440 <span>BC<\/span>). The land of Canaan was mentioned in a 15th-century inscription of Idrimi, king of Aleppo (west of Ugarit), who fled to the Canaanite seaport of Ammiya and then became ruler of Alalakh (north of Ugarit). During the Amarna Age (15th–14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Palestine was politically dominated by Egypt, according to the Egyptian Amarna tablets.<\/p>\n<p>Just as “Canaan” designated the whole western Palestinian area, so “Canaanite” described its pre-Israelite inhabitants without specifying race. Among the peoples who lived in Palestine, the Amorites first appeared in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> as immigrants from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n<p>Several OT references seem to equate Amorite territory and the land of Canaan (Gn 12:5-6; 15:18-21; 48:22), a tradition reflected in the 18th-century <span>BC<\/span> Alalakh tablets, which depicted “Amurru” as part of Syria-Palestine. Tablets from Mari from about the same period speak of an Amorite ruler of Hazor in northern Palestine. The Tell el-Amarna texts (14th–13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) indicate that the Amurru kingdom of the Lebanon region was monopolizing coastal trade and commerce; therefore, references to the two peoples (Amorites and Canaanites) together in Moses’ time and throughout the late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) are not surprising.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of that period, the “Sea Peoples” (largely Philistines) destroyed the Hittite Empire, and in the time of Ramses III (c. 1180 <span>BC<\/span>) occupied western Palestine. The Israelite conquest of Palestine broke the power of many Canaanite and Amorite city-states, while the rise of a Philistine confederacy on the southern Palestinian coast restricted further the range of specifically Canaanite territory. From the beginning of the Iron Age the cultural heirs of the Canaanites were the Phoenicians, centered in the city-states of Tyre and Sidon, who themselves liked to be known as Canaanites (cf. Mt 15:21-22; Mk 7:24-26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>The various groups that inhabited western Palestine in the pre-Israelite period probably spoke related dialects of the Northwest Semitic linguistic family. The large territory covered by those peoples and the possible influence of Amorite, Hurrian, and Ugaritic languages complicate modern theories about what is properly meant by “Canaanite” as a language.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Literature\">Literature<\/p>\n<p>As with language, it is difficult to be specific about Canaanite literature. One clear fact is that our own alphabet originated in middle Bronze Age Canaan. Before that time, writing was either pictographic (words or ideas represented by pictures), cuneiform (wedge-shaped impressions in soft clay representing syllables and whole words), or hieroglyphic (Egyptian pictorial writing). Alphabetical writing was passed on through the Hebrews and Phoenicians to the Greeks, who gave our present alphabet its classical form.<\/p>\n<p>Until 1929 little Canaanite literature was known, but with the discoveries at Ugarit a large body of literary material came to light. The discoveries included portions of an epic poem about the god Baal and his consort Anath (possibly from c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), a legend about a royal personage named Aqhat (from c. 1800 <span>BC<\/span>), the legendary activities of King Keret (written c. 1500 <span>BC<\/span>), and fragmentary religious, medical, and administrative material.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological evidence shows that western Palestine was occupied as far back as the Old Stone Age. Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic deposits have also been found at several sites. It is possible that Semitic-speaking peoples inhabited places such as Jericho, Megiddo, and Byblos around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Discoveries at Tell Mardikh (Ebla) show that a vigorous Canaanite Empire existed in Syria about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>, and there is no doubt that both Amorite and Canaanite peoples were firmly settled in Syria and Palestine by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. The best evidence for Canaanite occupation of western Palestine has come from the middle and late Bronze Age (c. 1950–1200 <span>BC<\/span>), when the land was dotted with Canaanite and Amorite city-states.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians made periodic forays into Palestine during their 5th and 6th dynasties; in the 13th dynasty (second millennium <span>BC<\/span>) they controlled much of Syria-Palestine both politically and economically.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite contacts with Mesopotamia from about 2000 <span>BC<\/span> are indicated in texts discovered at Mari and Ugarit. Evidently Amorites, Hurrians, early Assyrians, and other peoples periodically migrated to Canaan, bringing with them a diversity of political and social forms. By the late 16th century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the small Canaanite kingdoms were firmly under Egyptian control. Within two centuries the most northerly ones were subject to Hittite political influence.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite history is further complicated by the activities of the Hyksos people between about 1800 and 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. Of mixed Asiatic origin, the Hyksos owed much of their political influence to their military use of iron-fitted chariots and the compound Asiatic bow. From Canaanite locations like Hazor and Jericho, they invaded Egypt and established control there from about 1776 to about 1570 <span>BC<\/span>. When they were expelled at the start of Egypt’s New Kingdom (1570–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), they retreated to fortified sites in southern Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian control over western Palestine had disappeared by the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan; Joshua met predominantly Canaanite and Amorite opposition. The Israelite occupation of Canaan was aided by the state of decay into which the small Palestinian kingdoms had fallen. With the destruction of Hittite culture by the Sea Peoples and their occupation of the northern and coastal regions, the traditional city-states collapsed. From about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Canaanite culture was restricted to Tyre, Sidon, and a few other places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Before the Ugaritic discoveries, little was known about Canaanite religion apart from OT references to it. From what is now known of Canaanite culture, the head of the Canaanite list of gods was a shadowy personage named El, who was worshiped as the “father of man.” His consorts were Athirat, known to the Israelites as Asherah, Astarte, and Baaltis. El had a son, Baal, a fertility god described in myths as the lord of rain and storm. Baal succeeded his father as head of the pantheon (list of gods) and supposedly resided in the distant northern heavens. A monument found at Ugarit represented him carrying a thunderbolt at his left side and a mace in his right hand.<\/p>\n<p>Many small terra-cotta figurines with exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics, representing one or the other of the female deities, have been recovered from middle and late Bronze Age sites in western Palestine. A center devoted to the Anath cult, excavated at Byblos in Phoenicia, was evidently notorious for religious prostitution and sexual fertility rites; many naked female figures were found there. Other Canaanite cult objects included a sacred pillar of some sort <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">massebah<\/span><em>)<\/em> and a wooden image <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">asherah<\/span><em>),<\/em> probably of the goddess herself.<\/p>\n<p>In the Amarna Age, Canaanite orgiastic religion was especially influential in the Near East; it infiltrated to some extent even the conservative religions of Egypt and Babylonia. Four principal festivals associated with agriculture seem to have been celebrated by the Canaanites, invariably occasions of revelry, drunkenness, and sexual excess. Canaanite religion was evidently the most sexually depraved of any in the ancient world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InfluenceonIsrael\">Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p>Israelite morality, as defined by the covenant laws of Mt Sinai, was very different from the cultic traditions of Canaanite life. Hebrew ethical monotheism was in many ways opposite to the depraved polytheistic nature worship of Canaanite religion. It was clear that the two systems could not coexist. Hence the law contained strict instructions that the Canaanites and their ways were to be eliminated from the Promised Land (Ex 23:24; 34:13-16; Dt 7:1-5) and that the Hebrews were to remain separate from Canaanite religion in loyalty to God’s covenant. That was far from easy, if only because both peoples spoke closely related dialects and therefore used similar expressions of speech. Further, the invading Israelites under Joshua found that the Canaanites were superior to them in building stone structures and in making metal tools, implements, and weapons. The Hebrews, at a disadvantage, must have faced the prospect of requiring technical help from the Canaanites. In the time of King Solomon, Canaanites from Phoenicia were enlisted to design and construct the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem. A superficial resemblance between some aspects of Canaanite and Hebrew religion, such as peace offerings and certain divine titles, also made it difficult to maintain Israel’s cultural distinctiveness.<\/p>\n<p>Except for the “ban” imposed at Jericho, the Israelites were able to use Canaanite equipment captured in battle. Hence their determination to destroy all traces of the Canaanites, including their corrupt religion, was gradually weakened. By the time of King Ahab, when the worship of the Tyrian Baal was firmly entrenched in the northern kingdom of Israel, the Hebrews were in serious danger of losing their spiritual and theological distinctiveness. Their priests, who should have played a major part in maintaining the uniqueness of the covenant faith, often lapsed into Canaanite ways, emulating the immorality of their pagan neighbors and encouraging the Israelite people to do likewise (cf. 1 Sm 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>As a result, Hebrew prophets proclaimed that their nation, which had almost completely succumbed to Canaanite blandishments, would have to be purified by exile before a renewed faith could become a possibility for Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Israel, History of; Palestine.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CANAAN, CANAANITE<\/h3>\n<p>Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Land and People<\/p>\n<p>• Language<\/p>\n<p>• Literature<\/p>\n<p>• History<\/p>\n<p>• Religion<\/p>\n<p>• Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LandandPeople\">Land and People<\/p>\n<p>In the “table of nations” (Gn 10:15-19), Noah’s grandson Canaan was progenitor of 11 groups that lived in the area of Syria and Palestine. The first six evidently occupied territory at or south of Sidon, whereas the others lived farther north. The northerners mostly settled on the edge of the coastal plain; in the south, settlement spread eastward to the upland areas. OT references specifically placed the Canaanites in western Palestine’s valleys and coastal areas; the upland country was occupied by Amorites and other peoples (Nm 13:29; Jos 5:1; 7:9; Jgs 1:27-36).<\/p>\n<p>One of the earliest known references to the people of Canaan is in a tablet from Mari (15th century <span>BC<\/span>), in which a military officer reported his surveillance of “thieves and Canaanites.” The Canaanites were listed as a group on the Memphis Stele (inscribed column) of the Egyptian pharaoh Amenophis II (c. 1440 <span>BC<\/span>). The land of Canaan was mentioned in a 15th-century inscription of Idrimi, king of Aleppo (west of Ugarit), who fled to the Canaanite seaport of Ammiya and then became ruler of Alalakh (north of Ugarit). During the Amarna Age (15th–14th centuries <span>BC<\/span>), Palestine was politically dominated by Egypt, according to the Egyptian Amarna tablets.<\/p>\n<p>Just as “Canaan” designated the whole western Palestinian area, so “Canaanite” described its pre-Israelite inhabitants without specifying race. Among the peoples who lived in Palestine, the Amorites first appeared in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span> as immigrants from Mesopotamia.<\/p>\n<p>Several OT references seem to equate Amorite territory and the land of Canaan (Gn 12:5-6; 15:18-21; 48:22), a tradition reflected in the 18th-century <span>BC<\/span> Alalakh tablets, which depicted “Amurru” as part of Syria-Palestine. Tablets from Mari from about the same period speak of an Amorite ruler of Hazor in northern Palestine. The Tell el-Amarna texts (14th–13th centuries <span>BC<\/span>) indicate that the Amurru kingdom of the Lebanon region was monopolizing coastal trade and commerce; therefore, references to the two peoples (Amorites and Canaanites) together in Moses’ time and throughout the late Bronze Age (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>) are not surprising.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of that period, the “Sea Peoples” (largely Philistines) destroyed the Hittite Empire, and in the time of Ramses III (c. 1180 <span>BC<\/span>) occupied western Palestine. The Israelite conquest of Palestine broke the power of many Canaanite and Amorite city-states, while the rise of a Philistine confederacy on the southern Palestinian coast restricted further the range of specifically Canaanite territory. From the beginning of the Iron Age the cultural heirs of the Canaanites were the Phoenicians, centered in the city-states of Tyre and Sidon, who themselves liked to be known as Canaanites (cf. Mt 15:21-22; Mk 7:24-26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Language\">Language<\/p>\n<p>The various groups that inhabited western Palestine in the pre-Israelite period probably spoke related dialects of the Northwest Semitic linguistic family. The large territory covered by those peoples and the possible influence of Amorite, Hurrian, and Ugaritic languages complicate modern theories about what is properly meant by “Canaanite” as a language.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Literature\">Literature<\/p>\n<p>As with language, it is difficult to be specific about Canaanite literature. One clear fact is that our own alphabet originated in middle Bronze Age Canaan. Before that time, writing was either pictographic (words or ideas represented by pictures), cuneiform (wedge-shaped impressions in soft clay representing syllables and whole words), or hieroglyphic (Egyptian pictorial writing). Alphabetical writing was passed on through the Hebrews and Phoenicians to the Greeks, who gave our present alphabet its classical form.<\/p>\n<p>Until 1929 little Canaanite literature was known, but with the discoveries at Ugarit a large body of literary material came to light. The discoveries included portions of an epic poem about the god Baal and his consort Anath (possibly from c. 2000 <span>BC<\/span>), a legend about a royal personage named Aqhat (from c. 1800 <span>BC<\/span>), the legendary activities of King Keret (written c. 1500 <span>BC<\/span>), and fragmentary religious, medical, and administrative material.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>Archaeological evidence shows that western Palestine was occupied as far back as the Old Stone Age. Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Chalcolithic deposits have also been found at several sites. It is possible that Semitic-speaking peoples inhabited places such as Jericho, Megiddo, and Byblos around 3000 <span>BC<\/span>. Discoveries at Tell Mardikh (Ebla) show that a vigorous Canaanite Empire existed in Syria about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>, and there is no doubt that both Amorite and Canaanite peoples were firmly settled in Syria and Palestine by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>. The best evidence for Canaanite occupation of western Palestine has come from the middle and late Bronze Age (c. 1950–1200 <span>BC<\/span>), when the land was dotted with Canaanite and Amorite city-states.<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians made periodic forays into Palestine during their 5th and 6th dynasties; in the 13th dynasty (second millennium <span>BC<\/span>) they controlled much of Syria-Palestine both politically and economically.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite contacts with Mesopotamia from about 2000 <span>BC<\/span> are indicated in texts discovered at Mari and Ugarit. Evidently Amorites, Hurrians, early Assyrians, and other peoples periodically migrated to Canaan, bringing with them a diversity of political and social forms. By the late 16th century <span>BC<\/span>, most of the small Canaanite kingdoms were firmly under Egyptian control. Within two centuries the most northerly ones were subject to Hittite political influence.<\/p>\n<p>Canaanite history is further complicated by the activities of the Hyksos people between about 1800 and 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. Of mixed Asiatic origin, the Hyksos owed much of their political influence to their military use of iron-fitted chariots and the compound Asiatic bow. From Canaanite locations like Hazor and Jericho, they invaded Egypt and established control there from about 1776 to about 1570 <span>BC<\/span>. When they were expelled at the start of Egypt’s New Kingdom (1570–1100 <span>BC<\/span>), they retreated to fortified sites in southern Canaan.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian control over western Palestine had disappeared by the time of the Israelite conquest of Canaan; Joshua met predominantly Canaanite and Amorite opposition. The Israelite occupation of Canaan was aided by the state of decay into which the small Palestinian kingdoms had fallen. With the destruction of Hittite culture by the Sea Peoples and their occupation of the northern and coastal regions, the traditional city-states collapsed. From about 1100 <span>BC<\/span>, Canaanite culture was restricted to Tyre, Sidon, and a few other places.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Religion\">Religion<\/p>\n<p>Before the Ugaritic discoveries, little was known about Canaanite religion apart from OT references to it. From what is now known of Canaanite culture, the head of the Canaanite list of gods was a shadowy personage named El, who was worshiped as the “father of man.” His consorts were Athirat, known to the Israelites as Asherah, Astarte, and Baaltis. El had a son, Baal, a fertility god described in myths as the lord of rain and storm. Baal succeeded his father as head of the pantheon (list of gods) and supposedly resided in the distant northern heavens. A monument found at Ugarit represented him carrying a thunderbolt at his left side and a mace in his right hand.<\/p>\n<p>Many small terra-cotta figurines with exaggerated secondary sexual characteristics, representing one or the other of the female deities, have been recovered from middle and late Bronze Age sites in western Palestine. A center devoted to the Anath cult, excavated at Byblos in Phoenicia, was evidently notorious for religious prostitution and sexual fertility rites; many naked female figures were found there. Other Canaanite cult objects included a sacred pillar of some sort <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">massebah<\/span><em>)<\/em> and a wooden image <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">asherah<\/span><em>),<\/em> probably of the goddess herself.<\/p>\n<p>In the Amarna Age, Canaanite orgiastic religion was especially influential in the Near East; it infiltrated to some extent even the conservative religions of Egypt and Babylonia. Four principal festivals associated with agriculture seem to have been celebrated by the Canaanites, invariably occasions of revelry, drunkenness, and sexual excess. Canaanite religion was evidently the most sexually depraved of any in the ancient world.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InfluenceonIsrael\">Influence on Israel<\/p>\n<p>Israelite morality, as defined by the covenant laws of Mt Sinai, was very different from the cultic traditions of Canaanite life. Hebrew ethical monotheism was in many ways opposite to the depraved polytheistic nature worship of Canaanite religion. It was clear that the two systems could not coexist. Hence the law contained strict instructions that the Canaanites and their ways were to be eliminated from the Promised Land (Ex 23:24; 34:13-16; Dt 7:1-5) and that the Hebrews were to remain separate from Canaanite religion in loyalty to God’s covenant. That was far from easy, if only because both peoples spoke closely related dialects and therefore used similar expressions of speech. Further, the invading Israelites under Joshua found that the Canaanites were superior to them in building stone structures and in making metal tools, implements, and weapons. The Hebrews, at a disadvantage, must have faced the prospect of requiring technical help from the Canaanites. In the time of King Solomon, Canaanites from Phoenicia were enlisted to design and construct the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem. A superficial resemblance between some aspects of Canaanite and Hebrew religion, such as peace offerings and certain divine titles, also made it difficult to maintain Israel’s cultural distinctiveness.<\/p>\n<p>Except for the “ban” imposed at Jericho, the Israelites were able to use Canaanite equipment captured in battle. Hence their determination to destroy all traces of the Canaanites, including their corrupt religion, was gradually weakened. By the time of King Ahab, when the worship of the Tyrian Baal was firmly entrenched in the northern kingdom of Israel, the Hebrews were in serious danger of losing their spiritual and theological distinctiveness. Their priests, who should have played a major part in maintaining the uniqueness of the covenant faith, often lapsed into Canaanite ways, emulating the immorality of their pagan neighbors and encouraging the Israelite people to do likewise (cf. 1 Sm 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>As a result, Hebrew prophets proclaimed that their nation, which had almost completely succumbed to Canaanite blandishments, would have to be purified by exile before a renewed faith could become a possibility for Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Canaanite Deities and Religion; Israel, History of; Palestine.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CANAAN, CANAANITE Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites. Preview •...","summary_en":"CANAAN, CANAANITE Palestinian territory (the Promised Land) west of the Jordan River, settled by the Israelites at the time of Joshua’s leadership. Portions of southern Syria were also frequently considered part of Canaanite territory, the northern borders of which were never clearly defined. The pre-Israelite peoples of western Palestine, excluding northern Syria and such places as Ugarit (Ras Shamra) on the Mediterranean coast of Syria, carried the broad designation of Canaanites. Preview •...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15619,"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":22916,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lebanon","title_en":"Lebanon","content_ro":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","summary_en":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24379,"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":27060,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nations","title_en":"Nations","content_ro":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","summary_en":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37627,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Travel","title_en":"Travel","content_ro":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TRAVEL<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinOldTestamentTimes\">Travel in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Several accounts depict the people of Israel moving over restricted areas to graze their flocks. Joseph’s brothers took their flocks from the south of the land up to Shechem and then to Dothan (Gn 37:12-17), but this was a mere 60 miles (96.5 kilometers). David traveled around Palestine and even went to Moab (1 Sm 22:3). The Danites moved from their home southwest of Jerusalem to the north, just south of the Lebanon Mountains (Jgs 18).<\/p>\n<p>Examples of travel for pasturage, migration, and protection could be multiplied. Such travelers would normally walk, though the ass was used both for riding and as a pack animal. The ox was employed for transporting heavy loads and sometimes for people (Gn 46:5). Later the camel came into general use (1 Kgs 10:2; 2 Kgs 8:9). Little is known of resting places for travelers in OT times. There are only a few references to a “lodging place” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">malon<\/span>) in OT narratives (Gn 42:27; 43:21; Ex 4:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TravelinNewTestamentTimes\">Travel in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman world knew a great deal of travel: to fulfill religious obligations at festival time, for trade, for government administration, for military purposes. Not the least among first-century travelers were the early Christian missionaries.<\/p>\n<p>The advent of Roman peace and authority and the construction of well-made stone roads made travel relatively safe and quick. The modes of travel improved over that known in OT times. Long distances were traveled within the Roman Empire over good roads and in comparative safety. There were some hazards, however, notably in sea travel, from wind, storms, and pirates (Acts 15:39; 18:18-22; Rom 15:24-25; 2 Cor 11:25-26). Paul’s sea journey to Rome, for example, was perilous (Acts 27:1–28:14).<\/p>\n<p>The NT mentions a number of journeys on foot. Mary journeyed from Galilee to Judea to visit Elizabeth (Lk 1:39-40, 56). The baby Jesus was born in Bethlehem during the census (2:1-7); Jesus was brought to Jerusalem to comply with the Jewish purification law (v 22). Thus three trips were made from Nazareth to Jerusalem, a distance of about 70 miles (112.6 kilometers), from the time of Jesus’ conception to Mary’s purification. The annual Passover visit was made by Joseph and Mary (vv 41-51). Other journeys are mentioned (Jn 2:13; 5:1; 7:1-10; 12:1). Jesus himself walked to Jericho from Galilee (Mk 1:1-11) and also to the region of Tyre and Sidon (7:24). He was in Samaria more than once (Lk 17:11; Jn 4:4). His last journey to Jerusalem was via Jericho and up through the hills to Jerusalem (Mk 10:1, 46; 11:1). His last journey after the resurrection was to Emmaus (Lk 24:13-35).<\/p>\n<p>Paul traveled by sea on each of his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-14; 15:41–18:22; 18:23–21:17), generally accompanied by friends. He also made many journeys on foot in Palestine, Asia Minor, and the Greek peninsula. But not all travel was on foot in NT times. The ass, used for carrying loads, often carried people. Jesus once rode from Bethphage to Jerusalem, a short but highly symbolic journey (Mt 21:2-7; Mk 11:1-11; Jn 12:12-15). When Joseph traveled with his pregnant wife, Mary, to Bethlehem for the census at the time of Jesus’ birth, Mary probably rode on an ass. The Ethiopian eunuch was riding in a chariot after worshiping at Jerusalem and was joined by Philip traveling on foot (Acts 8:26-38). Roman soldiers both marched and made wide use of horses. When Paul was brought to Caesarea from Jerusalem, mounts were prepared for him (23:23-24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandSeaLanes\">Roads and Sea Lanes<\/p>\n<p>The roads of biblical times figured prominently in the geography, topography, and history of Palestine—a land that served as a bridge between Egypt and centers of civilization and trade in the Middle East. Many of the roads were strategically important, both commercially and militarily. Some roads gained significance as pilgrim routes to facilitate travel to religious centers like Jerusalem. Roads in biblical times were of three main types: long-distance international roads, medium-distance intraregional roads, and a variety of roads inside each region or state.<\/p>\n<h5>Great International Roads<\/h5>\n<p>These linked the Mediterranean coast to the northern Tigris Valley and southern Mesopotamia. Some linked Mesopotamia to Asia Minor, while others led south to Egypt, either along the coast or east of the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and across the Sinai Peninsula. There were trade routes between Anatolia and Assyria early in the second millennium <span>BC<\/span>. Apparently the military campaign referred to in Genesis 14 aimed to secure the great trade route, the King’s Highway, from northern Mesopotamia to Egypt. Military invaders and travelers from Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia would head across the hinterlands of Syria toward the coast before turning south into Palestine and Egypt. The advent of European powers, Greece and Rome, into the Middle East opened up another vast network of international roads for the peoples of the East. Until Roman times, these roads were not surfaced with stone but were cleared pathways. They were very rough, ungraded, and in wet weather, impassable in many places. But they were evidently well defined by “waymarks” and “guideposts” (Jer 31:21). With the coming of the Romans, important roads were built with deep foundations and with large blocks of flat stone at the surface. The remains of these roads are still seen in many places in the Middle East and in Europe. Distance markers or milestones were regularly placed along the roads.<\/p>\n<h5>International North-South Roads in Palestine<\/h5>\n<p>The roads that linked countries to the north with Egypt passed through Palestine, a natural land bridge. There were three major roads. The coastal road began in Damascus and passed via Hazor across the plain of Esdraelon, through the Megiddo Pass, down the coast past Gaza and into Egypt. This was probably “the way of the sea” (Is 9:1). The Sinai road led from Egypt into the southern Negev and then to Kadesh-barnea, Beersheba, Hebron, Jerusalem, Shechem, Acco, Tyre, and Sidon. The Red Sea road entered the Palestine area from the Gulf of Aqaba, where the ancient port of Elath and Solomon’s port of Ezion-geber stood (Nm 33:35; 2 Chr 8:17). From there it led through the mountainous areas of Transjordan, crossing the deep wadis and then north through the Hauran region to Damascus. This was the road taken by caravans from southern Arabia to Damascus, the ancient King’s Highway (Nm 20:17; 21:22).<\/p>\n<p>There were other north-south roads of lesser importance. One coastal road led from Joppa via Caesarea and Dor to Acco, where it linked with the Sinai road. Evidently it was not very significant until Roman times, when the port of Caesarea was built. The marshes in the plain of Sharon posed many problems. The plain of Esdraelon was also marshy and interrupted the roads north in bad seasons. A raised road across the swampy sections was eventually constructed. Another road led north from Hazor, branching off the main trunk road to Damascus. The Jordan Valley road skirted the southwestern part of Galilee and led down the Jordan Valley to Jericho.<\/p>\n<h5>East-West Roads<\/h5>\n<p>Several important roads ran east-west, intersecting the larger roads leading north. One such road led from Gaza to Beersheba and then down the Arabah, with an offshoot to Petra. Another led from Ashkelon, via Gath, to Hebron and on to En-gedi on the Dead Sea. Another road led from Joppa east up the valley of Aijalon (Jos 10:6-14) to Bethel and on to Jericho. One well-used road led from Joppa to Shechem, across the Jordan at Adam (3:16) and into Gilead in Transjordan. Other roads led from Acco eastward to Galilee and also up the coast to Tyre and Sidon. There were, indeed, numerous east-west roads that provided contact between various parts of Palestine. In Roman times, when the speedy movement of armies was essential, some of the old roads were greatly improved and new ones built.<\/p>\n<h5>Sea Lanes<\/h5>\n<p>The people of Israel, unlike the Phoenicians, seldom used the sea lanes. When Solomon planned to send ships down the Red Sea to Ophir (1 Kgs 9:26-28), he used Phoenician seamen. Jehoshaphat planned a similar expedition, but his ships were wrecked (22:48-49). Coastal traffic in OT times was in the hands of Philistines and Phoenicians. There were several ports along the Mediterranean Sea coast, such as Gaza, Joppa, Dor, and Acco, but none was very good. There were also sea lanes linking the Mediterranean coast with Egypt and distant Tarshish (probably Spain). The other coastal water was the Gulf of Aqaba with its two ports—Ezion-geber for Transjordan, and Elath for west of the Jordan. Solomon’s fleet used Ezion-geber as its home port.<\/p>\n\n<p>In NT times things changed considerably. The Middle East produced commodities used by peoples farther west, especially the Romans. Alexandria in Egypt and Antioch in Syria handled both cargo and travelers. Smaller ports like those in Palestine and many others around the coast of Asia Minor provided a haven for ships. One ingenious scheme to avoid a 200-mile (321.8-kilometer) journey around the Greek peninsula was to drag small boats across the five-mile- (8-kilometer-) wide isthmus at Corinth. Even the largest ship in NT times was in danger from wind and storm at sea (Acts 27), so sea travel was undertaken preferably when the risk of storms was minimal, roughly from November to March. There was a lot of sea traffic in the Mediterranean Sea at appropriate seasons, largely for trade. Grain ships crossed regularly from Rome to Egypt and to the east.<\/p>\n<p>Ships were driven by sail power supplemented as necessary by oars operated by slaves. Some indication of the size of ships comes from the discovery of ancient wrecks and from Latin and Greek literature. An old dry dock 130 feet (39.6 meters) long found near Athens was once used for Greek war vessels, which were smaller than the cargo vessels. The Roman writer Lucian refers to an Alexandrian grain ship 180 feet (54.9 meters) long, suggesting a capacity of about 1,200 tons (1,088.6 metric tons). Paul’s ship carried 276 persons (Acts 27:37). Modern underwater archaeology is providing valuable information about these ancient ships.<\/p>\n<h5>Reasons for Travel<\/h5>\n<p>The most important reason for travel in NT times was for trade and commerce, which involved far more than merely transporting goods. There were agents, supervisors, insurers of cargo, bankers, and a whole range of people involved in the acquisition and safe delivery of the cargo.<\/p>\n<p>Military travel was considerable. A wide variety of tasks had to be undertaken in the way of reconnaissance, procuring of supplies, forward arrangements for the bivouacking of troops, and the transport of both troops and equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Some travelers were tradespeople changing their place of employment, like Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2-3). Aquila had traveled from Pontus on the Black Sea to Rome and then, in a time of persecution, he had fled to Corinth with his wife. Many others traveled for similar reasons.<\/p>\n<p>People on religious pilgrimage traveled by land or sea. Jews from many lands journeyed to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivities (cf. Acts 2:5-11). Non-Jews went to religious centers at Ephesus, Athens, and Eleusis, where there were important temples. Many minor temples also attracted pilgrims. The construction of new temples and a variety of government administration buildings brought craftsmen from afar. Often the materials used in construction had to be transported to the site. Some people made trips for health reasons to temples famed for healing miracles or to enjoy the benefits of hot springs like those at Capernaum or Tiberias. Athletes traveled to centers for important contests like the Olympic games, and crowds of people flocked to witness the spectacle. Some travelers were students or teachers going to great centers of learning—the universities of those times. Yet others traveled as official emissaries bearing important government and commercial documents. Despite all this activity, vast numbers of ordinary citizens hardly ever traveled more than a few miles from their homes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","summary_en":"TRAVEL In biblical times travelers found roads bad and often impassable. Sea voyages were made in comparatively small ships, usually by military and commercial personnel, and hardly ever for simple tourist traffic. With little reason to travel, ordinary citizens tended to remain in fairly limited areas. From time to time, there were group migrations, and sometimes people traveled for religious festivals or fled from war or famine. Travel in Old Testament Times Several accounts depict the peop...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37808,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Tyre","title_en":"Tyre","content_ro":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TYRE<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 <span>BC<\/span>. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyptian citation from the same period. Tyre first appears in the Bible in the list of cities that comprised Asher’s inheritance (Jos 19:29). At that time, it was described as a “strong city” and was evidently never conquered by the Israelites (2 Sm 24:7). Tyre was most significant as a mercantile center, with maritime contacts throughout the Mediterranean region and overland traffic with Mesopotamia and Arabia.<\/p>\n<p>During David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, Tyre was a strong commercial ally of Israel. Both David and Solomon contracted with Hiram of Tyre for timber, building materials, and skilled laborers, for which they provided Tyre with agriculture produce (2 Sm 5:11; 1 Kgs 5:1-11; 1 Chr 14:1; 2 Chr 2:3-16). After the division of the kingdom, Tyre evidently maintained friendly relations with Israel for some time. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, was the daughter of “Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians,” a king who is known elsewhere as Ithobal of Tyre (1 Kgs 16:31; cf. Menander). At some point, however, the pressure of Assyrian and Babylonian aggression dissolved the alliance, so that by the time of Samaria’s fall, Tyre and Israel were no longer aligned and shortly thereafter became enemies.<\/p>\n<p>During the later kingdom period, Tyre was the focus for some of the strongest prophetic denunciations recorded in Scripture (Is 23:1-18; Jer 25:22; 27:1-11; Ez 26:1-19; Jl 3:4-8; Am 1:9-10). Tyre’s condemnation was justified for several reasons. Because of its commercial significance, Tyre was the focal point of Assyrian and Egyptian rivalries. Tyre managed, however, to play these rivals against each other while building its wealth and exploiting its neighbors. Additionally, the city of Tyre was not only a city of unscrupulous merchants but also a center of religious idolatry and sexual immorality. Foremost among Tyre’s sins was pride induced by its great wealth and strategic location. Ezekiel’s prophecy against Tyre offers a detailed picture of the city, its commercial empire, its sin, and its eventual demise (Ez 26:1-28; 29:18-20). The final destruction of Tyre did not come for almost 1,900 years (<span>AD<\/span> 1291), though it was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar for 13 years (587–574 <span>BC<\/span>), and conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 <span>BC<\/span> after a seven-month siege, during which he built a causeway out to the island. Ezekiel’s description of Tyre’s arrogance can be compared to that of Satan’s, with Tyre’s words “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God” (<span>kjv<\/span>) being the expression that led to the fall of both Satan and Tyre (Ez 28:2).<\/p>\n<p>Despite Alexander’s destruction of the city, Tyre had regained prominence by the NT period, being equal to or greater than Jerusalem in terms of population and commercial power. Jesus visited the region surrounding Tyre during his early ministry, healing the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter (Mt 15:21-28; Mk 7:24-31). Jesus also compared the Galilean towns that had rejected him to Tyre and Sidon, suggesting that the Galileans would bear greater responsibility for their rejection because of the number of miracles he had performed among them (Lk 10:13-14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","summary_en":"TYRE Ancient Phoenician city-state located on the Mediterranean coast 20 miles (32.2 kilometers) south of Sidon and 23 miles (37 kilometers) north of Acre. Tyre consisted of two major parts: an older port city on the mainland and an island city a half mile (.8 kilometer) from the coast where the majority of the population lived. According to Herodotus, Tyre was founded around 2700 BC. Its earliest historical attestations, however, are references in a 15th-century Ugaritic document and an Egyp...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55301,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","summary_en":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55302,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","summary_en":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82927,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","summary_en":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82928,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","summary_en":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110553,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","summary_en":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110554,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","summary_en":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138179,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24-30<\/strong> The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","summary_en":"7:24-30 The discussion of clean and unclean and of undefiled and defiled in 7:1-23 has prepared readers for the story of the Gentile woman’s faith. For Jews, Gentiles were defiled by definition, because they did not keep the regulations of the Torah (see Acts 10:1–11:18, especially 10:14-15; 11:2-3, 8-9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138180,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:24<\/strong> The city of <em>Tyre<\/em> and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 <span>BC<\/span>. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus <em>left Galilee<\/em> to visit this Gentile <em>region<\/em>. Mark provides no explanation, so any suggestion is pure speculation. Mark’s Gentile readers, however, would have understood this journey by Jesus as foreshadowing the church’s mission to the Gentile world that led to their own conversion (for more about the genesis of the church in Rome, see Romans Book Introduction).<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","summary_en":"7:24 The city of Tyre and its surrounding regions lie on the Mediterranean coast in modern-day Lebanon. Originally an island, Tyre became a peninsula when Alexander the Great constructed a half-mile ramp from the mainland in 332 BC. Tyre had one of the most important harbors on the eastern side of the Mediterranean Sea. People earlier had come from Tyre to hear Jesus and see him work miracles (3:7-8), which explains how the Tyrian woman knew of him. • There is much discussion about why Jesus ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65371,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92997,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120623,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148249,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":1840,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Animals","title_en":"Animals","content_ro":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANIMALS<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals as object lessons.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical approach to classification of animals is somewhat different from the system of classification used by biologists today. The present system of classification, which traces back to Carolus Linnaeus (an 18th-century Swedish botanist), is based on structure, both internal and external. The biblical basis of classification is habitat. Thus Genesis 1 speaks of aquatic organisms (v 20); aerial organisms (v 21); animals that crawl on the ground (v 24); cattle or domesticated animals (animals that live in association with humans) (v 24); and wild animals (v 24). The same system of classification is followed in Leviticus 11 and throughout Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Because of the divergence between systems of classification, the various animals of the Bible will be listed here in alphabetical order—including reptiles, fish, and even invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms, and sponges. Birds are discussed in a separate article.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Adder<\/p>\n<p>• Ant<\/p>\n<p>• Antelope<\/p>\n<p>• Ape<\/p>\n<p>• Asp<\/p>\n<p>• Ass<\/p>\n<p>• Badger<\/p>\n<p>• Bat<\/p>\n<p>• Bear<\/p>\n<p>• Bee<\/p>\n<p>• Behemoth<\/p>\n<p>• Camel<\/p>\n<p>• Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>• Cattle<\/p>\n<p>• Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>• Coral<\/p>\n<p>• Cricket<\/p>\n<p>• Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>• Deer<\/p>\n<p>• Dog<\/p>\n<p>• Donkey<\/p>\n<p>• Dragon<\/p>\n<p>• Fish<\/p>\n<p>• Flea<\/p>\n<p>• Fly<\/p>\n<p>• Fox<\/p>\n<p>• Frog<\/p>\n<p>• Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>• Gecko<\/p>\n<p>• Gnat<\/p>\n<p>• Goat<\/p>\n<p>• Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>• Hare<\/p>\n<p>• Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>• Horse<\/p>\n<p>• Hyena<\/p>\n<p>• Jackal<\/p>\n<p>• Leech<\/p>\n<p>• Leopard<\/p>\n<p>• Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>• Lion<\/p>\n<p>• Lizard<\/p>\n<p>• Locust<\/p>\n<p>• Mole<\/p>\n<p>• Moth<\/p>\n<p>• Mouse<\/p>\n<p>• Mule<\/p>\n<p>• Pig<\/p>\n<p>• Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>• Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>• Sheep<\/p>\n<p>• Snail<\/p>\n<p>• Snake<\/p>\n<p>• Spider<\/p>\n<p>• Sponge<\/p>\n<p>• Unicorn<\/p>\n<p>• Wasp<\/p>\n<p>• Whale<\/p>\n<p>• Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>• Wolf<\/p>\n<p>• Worm<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Adder\">Adder<\/p>\n<p>One of the 20 poisonous snakes found in Israel and surrounding countries, also referred to as cockatrice and viper. True vipers (genus <em>Cerastes, Echis colorata,<\/em> and <em>Vipera palestina<\/em>) also exist there, poisonous snakes with curved fangs that spring into position when the snake strikes. The horned viper <em>(Cerastes hasselquistii)<\/em> may attack horses. It is 12 to 18 inches (30 to 46 centimeters) long and often lies in ambush in the sand with only its eyes and the hornlike protrusions on its head visible.<\/p>\n<p>Both Jesus and John the Baptist referred to the viper several times (Mt 3:7; 12:34; 23:33). The reference in Acts 28:3 is probably to a small viper <em>(Vipera aspis)<\/em> that strikes rapidly and is very pugnacious. It is found in southern Europe and hisses each time it inhales and exhales. The poison of vipers attacks the respiratory system and disintegrates red blood cells.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ant\">Ant<\/p>\n<p>Mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in the book of Proverbs. For many years Solomon was charged with a biological error when he referred to the ant as providing her meat in the summer and gathering her food in the harvest (Prv 6:8). Critics of the Bible were quick to point out that, so far as was then known, ants do not store up food. They assumed that Solomon had probably kicked open an ant hill and mistaken the pupal cases (pods in which immature ants grow to maturity) for grain or had observed ants carrying bits of grain, leaves, and other matter to their nests.<\/p>\n<p>At least three species of grain-storing ants are now known—two occur in Israel and the other in Mediterranean countries. The particular species referred to by Solomon (Prv 6:6-8; 30:24-25) is probably the harvester ant <em>(Messor semirufus).<\/em> Its granaries are flat chambers connected by galleries irregularly scattered over an area about six feet (1.8 meters) in diameter and about a foot (.3 meter) deep in the ground. Seeds are collected from the ground or picked from plants. The head, or radicle, which is the softest part of the kernel, is bitten off to prevent germination, and the chaff and empty capsules are discarded on kitchen middens (refuse piles) outside the nest. Individual granaries may be 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) in diameter and a half inch (1.2 centimeters) high. Some nests are known to be 40 feet (12 meters) in diameter and 6 to 7 feet (approx. 2 meters) deep with several entrances.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antelope\">Antelope<\/p>\n<p>Several antelope-like creatures are referred to in the Scriptures. One seems to be the white oryx <em>(Oryx leucoryx),<\/em> referred to in Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild ox”; <span>rsv<\/span> “antelope”) and Isaiah 51:20 (<span>kjv<\/span> “wild bull”; <span>RSV <\/span>“antelope”). The oryx was probably the antelope, commonly used for food because its long horns made it relatively easy to catch.<\/p>\n<p>Another antelope mentioned in the Bible is the addax <em>(Addax nasomaculatus),<\/em> probably the “pygarg” of Deuteronomy 14:5 (<span>kjv<\/span>). It is a native of North Africa with grayish white hinder parts, a white patch on the forehead, and twisted and ringed horns. The word “pygarg” comes from a Greek word meaning “white rump.” The addax is about the size of a donkey. Its body is closely covered with short hair. It has a short mane on the underside of its neck that makes the head look somewhat like that of a goat. The hooves are broad and flat, and the tail resembles that of a donkey. It is common in Africa and in Arabia, where Arabs hunt it with falcons and dogs.<\/p>\n<p>Antelopes are very graceful and run with their heads held high. Both sexes have long, permanent, hollow horns. With the oryx the horns go straight back; addax horns are twisted and ringed. Antelope are alert, wary, and keen sighted. They are usually found in herds of from two to a dozen. If injured or brought to bay, an antelope attacks with its head lowered so that the sharp horns point forward. Antelopes feed on grasses and shrubs, drinking from streams and water holes. When water is scarce, they eat melons and succulent bulbs. Both addax and oryx were ceremonially clean in Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ape\">Ape<\/p>\n<p>Primate not native to Palestine. The two references to apes in the OT (1 Kgs 10:22; 2 Chr 9:21) refer to their importation by King Solomon with other treasures on board the ships of his mercantile fleet. There is some question concerning the origin of those primates. Some believe that the mention of “ivory” in the same verses suggests they came from East Africa and that they were indeed apes, that is, tailless primates. Others, believing they came from India or Ceylon, suggest that they were actually monkeys. There the baboon (genus Papeio), a large monkey, was considered sacred to the god Thoth. Males of that genus were kept in temples, and the more docile females were often kept as house pets. Such baboons frequently had some of their teeth removed or ground down to lessen the danger of their biting. A number of mummified baboons have been found in Egypt, indicating the high regard in which they were held.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Asp\">Asp<\/p>\n<p>Poisonous snake. Most biblical references to the asp (Dt 32:33) seem to be to the Egyptian cobra <em>(Naja haje),<\/em> which conceals itself in holes, walls, and rocks and has the ability to expand its neck by raising its anterior ribs so as to enlarge the front of its breast into the shape of a flat disc. Its potent poison can cause death in 30 minutes. It attains a length of about 80 inches (2 meters). The fangs are permanently erect, not movable as in the vipers (the common poisonous snakes of North America; only the coral snake in America has permanently erect fangs). Cobra poison attacks the nervous system, causing muscular paralysis. The Egyptians looked upon it as a sacred creature; they regarded it as a protector since it fed on the rodents that ate their crops. The “fiery serpents” (Nm 21:6; Dt 8:15, both <span>rsv<\/span>) may have been cobras; “fiery” probably refers to the burning fever caused by their venom. Isaiah 14:29 and 30:6 (“flying serpent”) may refer to the hood of the cobra.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Snake (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Ass\">Ass<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Donkey (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Badger\">Badger<\/p>\n<p>Small hoofed mammal. What the <span>kjv<\/span> calls a “coney,” modern translations name “rock badger” (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7; Ps 104:18; Prv 30:26). The rock badger spoken of in the Bible is probably the Syrian rock hyrax <em>(Hyrax syriaca),<\/em> the only species of hyrax found outside Africa. This small ungulate (having hooflike toenails) lives among rocks from the Dead Sea valley to Mt Hermon. It is strictly a herbivorous (plant-eating) animal about the size of a rabbit. It resembles a guinea pig more than a rabbit, having quite inconspicuous ears and a very small tail. It has broad nails with four toes on its forelegs and three on its hind legs, the toes being connected with skin almost like a web. Pads acting as sucking discs under its feet enable it to keep its footing on slippery rocks. With its yellow and brown fur, it is sometimes called the bear rat because of its resemblance to a tailless rat. It is also equipped with black whiskers that may be seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p>These rock badgers, or hyraxes, live together in colonies of from 6 to 50 animals, often sunning themselves on rocks. They are difficult to catch. Guards are posted, and if approaching danger is sighted, the whole group will scurry for cover, warned by the sharp whistles of the guards. Thus they are commended for taking refuge in the rocks (Ps 104:18) and are called wise for making “their houses in the rocks” (Prv 30:24, 26, <span>kjv<\/span>). The badger is not a ruminant (does not chew its cud), but the motion of its jaws may suggest that it chews its cud. That is probably why it was included with other cud-chewing animals in the Jewish food laws (Lv 11:5; Dt 14:7). It was forbidden to the Jews as food because it did not have cloven hooves. Some Arabs eat and even prize its meat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bat\">Bat<\/p>\n<p>Flying mammals according to modern classification. They have hair and provide milk for their young. The Bible classifies them with other aerial creatures. Bats take shelter in caves, crevices, tree cavities, buildings, and also in exposed places on trees. In colder areas they hibernate or migrate. The normal resting position for a bat is hanging head downward. Bats “swim” through the air rather than fly because they move with their legs as well as with their wings.<\/p>\n<p>The bat’s thumb is free and terminates in a single hook claw used for climbing and hanging. The hind feet have five toes, all pointing the same way. The large chest accommodates the powerful muscles needed for flying. Because they orient themselves by echo location, the sense of hearing is very well developed.<\/p>\n<p>Most bats are insect eaters, seizing insects in flight. Many insectivorous bats also eat some fruit. Other bats feed exclusively, usually in groups, on fruit and green vegetation. Fruit-eating bats generally live in the tropics where fruit is constantly ripening, although some have been found in the Holy Land. These bats tend to be larger than the insectivores, having a wingspread of up to five feet (1.5 meters).<\/p>\n<p>A third group includes flower-eating bats that feed on pollen and nectar. These small bats with long pointed heads and long tongues are found only in tropical and semitropical regions. Three species of vampire bats, which do not occur in the Holy Land, eat blood by making a small incision and lapping it up. Carnivorous (meat-eating) bats prey on birds, lizards, and frogs. Fish-eating bats catch fish at or near the water surface.<\/p>\n<p>Eight varieties of bats are known in the Holy Land. One of them, the little brown bat (genus <em>Myotis<\/em>), is worldwide in its distribution. It is insectivorous and probably has the widest distribution of any nonhuman terrestrial mammal. Brown bats are mostly cave dwellers. The females form maternity colonies that may number in the tens of thousands.<\/p>\n<p>Two species of mouse-tailed bats (genus <em>Rhinopoma<\/em>) are found in the Holy Land. Their tails are nearly as long as the head and body combined. They are colonial, roosting in caves, rock clefts, wells, pyramids, palaces, and houses. Like the brown bat, they are insectivorous. The slit-faced or hollow-faced bats (genus <em>Nycteris<\/em>) are also found in the Holy Land. They are insectivorous and roost in groups from 6 to 20.<\/p>\n<p>The bats found in the Holy Land vary in size from that of a mouse to the size of a rat; the largest species measures more than 20 inches (51 centimeters) across the wings. The bat was unclean to the Jews (Lv 11:19; Dt 14:18).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bear\">Bear<\/p>\n<p>Large, heavy, big-headed mammal with short, powerful limbs, a short tail, and small eyes and ears. Bears have a “plantigrade” walk: they walk on both the sole and heel as humans do. The Palestinian bear is a Syrian version of the brown bear <em>(Ursus arctos syriacus).<\/em> It can grow to a height of 6 feet (1.8 meters) and may weigh as much as 500 pounds (227 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>Bears have an excellent sense of smell but less developed senses of sight and hearing. They are omnivorous (eating any kind of food); they subsist largely on vegetation, fruits, insects, and fish.<\/p>\n<p>Bears are usually peaceful and inoffensive, but if they think they must defend themselves (Lam 3:10) or their young (2 Sm 17:8; Prv 17:12; Hos 13:8), they may be formidable and dangerous adversaries. David boasted of his role as a bear killer (1 Sm 17:34-37). Since a blow from a bear’s paw can be fatal, David’s courage and strength as a young shepherd in running after a bear and wrenching one of his father’s sheep from its jaws were noteworthy.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical passages seem to imply that bears attacked for no apparent reason (e.g., Prv 28:15; Am 5:19). At other times they were God’s instruments of punishment, as in the story of Elisha and the two she-bears (2 Kgs 2:24). The bear and the lion, often mentioned together in the Bible (1 Sm 17:37), were the two largest and strongest beasts of prey in the Holy Land. Thus they symbolized both strength and terror (Am 5:19).<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times bears seem to have roamed all over Palestine. Today they are found only in the Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon Mountains, and even there they are rare.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Bee\">Bee<\/p>\n<p>One of two domesticated insects <em>(Apis mellifica),<\/em> the other being the silkworm. Bees gather nectar from flowers, transferring pollen from one flower to another in the process. It is believed that they convey the location of sources of nectar to other bees through a bee “dance,” which may indicate both distance and direction. Bees are sensitive to four colors: blue-green, yellow-green, blue-violet, and ultra-violet (invisible to humans).<\/p>\n<p>The wild bees of the Holy Land are especially noted for their ferocity in attack. Only the female “worker” bees sting people and animals, the virulence of their venom increasing in warm weather. A number of biblical passages allude to the irritable, vindictive nature of bees and to the painful stings they inflict (Dt 1:44; Ps 118:12; Is 7:18).<\/p>\n<p>One reference calls attention to the fact that in semidesert regions a dead animal’s carcass, stripped to the bone by jackals or vultures and dried in the sun, can provide wild bees an excellent place to start a new colony (Jgs 14:5-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptians considered the bee sacred. In ancient Greece candles were made from beeswax. In the Holy Land, beekeeping was probably not practiced until the Hellenistic period (second century <span>BC<\/span>), although Ezekiel 27:17 suggests that it may have been practiced earlier. If domestic honey was not available to the Hebrews, wild honey certainly was, and travelers would be on the lookout for caches of honey in rocky clefts and other likely places. The Philistines and the Hittites practiced beekeeping in their cities.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible contains many references to bees and bee products. A bee swarm was a valuable asset, though the price of honey itself was low. Honey was sometimes eaten with the honeycomb (Sg 5:1). Honey also had uses other than food, e.g., in embalming.<\/p>\n<p>The land of Israel was described as a land flowing with milk and honey. Honey was a major source of sweetening in the ancient Near East—hence, its importance (cf. Jgs 14:8-9). Actually the Hebrew word for “honey” may include not only bee honey but also the sweet syrup extracted from such fruits as figs, dates, and grapes. Thus “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Ex 3:8, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not necessarily stand for a land of bees but for a land rich in sweetness.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Food and Food Preparation; Honey.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Behemoth\">Behemoth<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Hippopotamus (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Camel\">Camel<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of burden. Unintelligent, ill-natured, and quarrelsome, the camel <em>(Camelus dromedarius)<\/em> is nevertheless a blessing to people living in the desert and on its borders because it is especially adapted to that habitat. It has been called the ship of the desert. Having thick elastic pads of fibrous tissue on its feet, it can walk on hot desert sands. It can go without water for long periods and can subsist on vegetation growing on the saline soils. The camel’s nostrils are pinched together and can be closed at will to prevent penetration of sand during violent sandstorms.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are used for transporting both goods and people. A person riding a camel can cover from 60 to 75 miles (96.5 to 121 kilometers) in a day. A camel can carry a load weighing 600 pounds (272 kilograms) or more. Camels were used heavily in the spice trade (Gn 37:25) and traveled regularly in camel trains between Arabia, Egypt, and Assyria. They were also ridden in time of war (Jgs 6:5). A camel can even be hitched to a plow in areas where the land is cultivated.<\/p>\n<p>The hair shed by camels during the early spring is preserved and used in weaving cloth and making tents. As much as 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) of hair can be obtained from one camel. A rough cloak of camel’s hair, as worn by John the Baptist (Mt 3:4), is still worn by Bedouins today. A camel’s hair garment was also the sign of the prophetic office (Zec 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of camel occur within the one-humped species, the slow burden-bearing camel referred to in Genesis 37:25 and the fast dromedary of 1 Samuel 30:17. The dromedary can stand seven feet (2.1 meters) tall and measure as much as nine feet (2.7 meters) from the muzzle to the tip of the tail. With its three-chambered stomach, which can hold from 15 to 30 quarts (14.2 to 28.4 liters) of liquid, it can go for as long as 5 days during the summer or 25 days in winter without drinking. The camel’s hump is a reserve store of fat, making it possible for the animal to subsist on very little food during a desert journey.<\/p>\n<p>Another species of camel, the Bactrian camel <em>(Camelus bactrianus),<\/em> is also resident in the Holy Land. It has two humps. It is heavier, bigger, and has longer hair than the one-humped camel and is slower than the swift dromedary. Isaiah 21:7 may refer to the Bactrian camel; both kinds of camel are referred to in Esther 8:10 (<span>kjv<\/span>). Camels ranked in importance with sheep, cattle, and asses in OT times. A third of the 66 biblical references to the camel lists it with other animals.<\/p>\n<p>Camels are ruminants (cud-chewing mammals) but do not have cloven hooves. Thus, they were included in the list of unclean beasts, forbidden by the Israelites as food (Lv 11:4; Dt 14:7). They are eaten by Arabs, however, who also drink their milk (cf. Gn 32:15).<\/p>\n<p>Abraham had camels in Egypt (Gn 12:16). At first Job had 3,000 camels (Jb 1:3) and after his recovery, 6,000 (Jb 42:12). Although wide use of camels does not seem to have begun until shortly before 1000 <span>BC<\/span> (Jgs 6:5), Sumerian texts from the Old Babylonian period list camels and indicate that they had been domesticated. Camel bones and figurines have been found at various eastern archaeological sites dating from well before 1200 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Caterpillar\">Caterpillar<\/p>\n<p>Larval stage of insects characterized by complete metamorphosis. Such insects pass through four stages: egg, larva or caterpillar, pupa, and adult. Bees, flies, moths, and butterflies all pass through a larval or caterpillar stage.<\/p>\n<p>The word “caterpillar” occurs three times in the <span>nlt<\/span> (1 Kgs 8:37; 2 Chr 6:28; Ps 78:46). In the book of Joel that same Hebrew word is translated “locust” (1:4; 2:25, <span>nlt<\/span>). The locust and grasshopper to which the Hebrew word refers have an incomplete type of metamorphosis with only three stages: egg, nymph, and adult. The nymph is a miniature adult in which the wings are not fully developed, though their outline may be present. There are several nymph stages known as instars. The reference is to one of the last instars, in which the wing structures are still folded together and enclosed in a sac but are nevertheless clearly recognizable. That form of the insect is about an inch (2.5 centimeters) long.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cattle\">Cattle<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animals of the bovine species <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> The OT often emphasized the beauty of cattle. Egypt was rich in cattle, especially in the Nile River delta area (Goshen), where the Hebrews settled under Joseph.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars believe that milk rather than meat was the foremost consideration in the domestication of cattle and that in early civilizations meat supplies came chiefly from wild game. Cattle also supplied strong hides that supplanted wood in the manufacture of shields. Their dung was a source of fuel when wood was scarce (Ez 4:15). They were used as beasts of burden and for plowing. Development of wheeled transportation was associated more closely with cattle than with any other animal.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical term “cattle” often refers to all domesticated animals or livestock (Gn 1:24; 2:20; 7:23; 47:6, 16-17; Ex 9:3-7; Nm 3:41, 45). Occasionally, the term was used to refer to all large domestic animals (Nm 31:9; 32:26), although sometimes the word as used in the <span>kjv<\/span> refers only to sheep and goats (Gn 30:32, 39, 43; 31:8, 10; Is 7:25; 43:23).<\/p>\n<p>Probably several kinds of cattle were domesticated in the Holy Land. Small, short-legged, black or brown shorthorn cattle were found in the southern part of Judah; that type submitted easily to the yoke and was prominent in agricultural operations. Along the coast a larger variety was found, and the wild districts east of the Jordan River were populated with a breed of huge black cattle.<\/p>\n<p>Cattle breeding was widely practiced by the patriarchs (cf. Gn 32:15; Jb 21:10). Strict laws in Mesopotamia, as well as in Israel, penalized the owner of a bull that gored a man or other cattle (Ex 21:28-36). Bulls were sometimes employed figuratively as pictures of strength or violence (Dt 33:17; Pss 22:12; 68:30; Is 10:13). For breeding purposes one bull is normally adequate for about 30 cows, but many more were kept since bulls were widely used in Israel for sacrifices. They might be used as a general sacrifice (Lv 22:23; Nm 23:1) or for special sacrifices (Jgs 6:25; 1 Sm 1:24). Particular sacrifices were offered at the consecration of priests (Ex 29:1), consecration of an altar (Nm 7), purification of the Levites (Nm 8), sin offerings (Lv 16), day of the new moon (Nm 28:11-14), Passover (Nm 28:19), Feast of Weeks (Nm 28:27), Feast of Trumpets (Nm 29:1-2), Day of Atonement (Nm 29:7-9), and the Feast of Tabernacles (Nm 29:12-38). The Feast of Tabernacles required the largest number of bulls for burnt offerings of all the annual feasts, with a total of 71 being slaughtered during the course of eight days.<\/p>\n<p>Calves were sometimes referred to as “sons of the herd” in the original Hebrew (Gn 18:8; 1 Sm 6:7; 14:32). The calf, a symbol of peacefulness (Is 11:6), was also used figuratively to refer to the weak (Ps 68:30). A calf’s head decorated the back of Solomon’s throne (1 Kgs 10:19). Calves were sometimes fattened in stalls to keep them from running off weight in the field (Am 6:4; Mal 4:2; Lk 15:23) or were kept around the house; the witch of Endor kept a calf in her house that she killed and served to Saul and his men (1 Sm 28:24-25). Calves supplied veal (Gn 18:7), considered a delicacy by the wealthy; Amos referred to stall-fattened calves in a denunciation of luxurious and careless living (Am 6:4). Calves also supplied meat for all Saul’s armies at the great slaughter of the Philistines (1 Sm 14:32). The “fatted calf” served roasted or boiled was gourmet fare, suitable for the finest banquet (Gn 18:7; Mt 22:4; Lk 15:23).<\/p>\n<p>Cattle were subject to the law of firstlings (Ex 13:12). They were a mark of wealth (Gn 13:2) and were considered proper booty of war (Jos 8:2). Aaron, the first high priest, made a golden calf as a rival to the ark of the covenant (Ex 32; Dt 9:16, 21). Even though he represented the calf as an image of the invisible God, it was especially offensive because the calf was a fertility symbol related to Egyptian and Canaanite practices. Two calves were later made by Jeroboam I of Israel (930–909 <span>BC<\/span>) for his shrines at Bethel and Dan (1 Kgs 12:28-33). Hosea’s prophetic denunciations of calf worship were directed at those shrines (Hos 8:5-6; 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>An ox is an adult castrated bull. A steer is a young ox. Oxen were used to do work (Nm 7:3; Dt 22:10; 25:4), though for moving heavy objects, cows were typically favored over bulls because of their more docile nature. Oxen were also used as pack animals (1 Chr 12:40, although they did not have the endurance of the ass, camel, or mule. They usually fed on grass (Nm 22:4; Ps 106:20), but they also ate straw (Is 11:7) and salted fodder (Is 30:24) and could be kept in a stable (Lk 13:15). Oxen could not be offered as sacrifices because they had been castrated (Lv 22:24). They could be used for food but were rarely eaten. Possession of an ox and an ass was regarded as the bare minimum for existence in the ancient Palestinian agriculture economy (Jb 24:3; cf. Ex 20:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Food and Food Preparation; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Chameleon\">Chameleon<\/p>\n<p>Lizard characterized by its ability to change color according to its surroundings <em>(Chameleon vulgaris).<\/em> To the Israelites the chameleon was ritually unclean (Lv 11:30). The Hebrew word for chameleon is derived from a word meaning “to pant.” A lizard’s lungs are very large, and in ancient times lizards were believed to live on air. A chameleon’s eyes move independently of each other; so at times one eye may be turned upward and the other downward. Chameleons live in trees and bushes, clinging to branches with their long tails.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Coral\">Coral<\/p>\n<p>Calcareous (lime-containing) skeletons of relatively simple marine organisms <em>(Corallium rubrum).<\/em> Red coral from the Mediterranean and Red Seas is widely used for jewelry and for medicinal purposes. While the animal is alive, the coral is green in color and shrublike in appearance, looking rather like an underwater plant since the coral animals are immobil. When the coral is removed from the water, it becomes hard and red in color.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient times coral was sometimes used as money, along with precious stones, pearls, and gold. Some believe the biblical reference in Lamentations 4:7 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is to pearls rather than to coral, but it is probable that the references in Job 28:18 and Ezekiel 27:16 are to the red coral (see <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cricket\">Cricket<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the order Orthptera related to grasshoppers and locusts. According to Leviticus 11:22, the cricket was edible. The reference may be to one of the growth stages of the locust.<\/p>\n<p>The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word as “beetle.” Beetles are insects with chewing mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the fore pair being hard and sheathlike and the hind pair being membranous and folded under the fore pair. Some beetles are carnivorous, others are chiefly herbivorous. Some are aquatic, some produce a secretion that blisters the skin, some damage fabrics, some damage crops, and some feed on other insects that are harmful to humans. In ancient Egypt the beetle, or sacred scarab, was a symbol of the sun god Ra. Scarab seals and amulets were extremely popular in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Crocodile\">Crocodile<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all existing reptiles <em>(Crocodilus vulgaris),<\/em> attaining a length of well over 20 feet (6 meters). Crocodiles are characterized by large lizardlike bodies supported by short legs. The head terminates in a flattened snout armed with strong conical teeth, each of which is implanted in a distinct socket. New teeth growing from beneath continually replace those in use. The toes are webbed. The back and tail are protected by quadrangular horny shields of varying sizes arranged in regular rows and in contact with one another at the edges. The eyes are covered with movable lids that can be closed when the animal enters the water.<\/p>\n<p>The crocodile spends most of its time in the water where it feeds mainly on fish but also on aquatic birds and even small animals that come down to the water’s edge to drink. It is surprisingly fast and agile on dry land, even though its legs are so short that its belly and tail drag across the earth leaving a distinct path.<\/p>\n<p>Until the beginning of the 20th century, the crocodile was found in the marshes and small coastal rivers of western Palestine. A first-century Roman writer, Pliny, referred to a place in the Holy Land called Crocodeilopolis (“crocodile city”) to the south of Mt Carmel, and visitors to the Holy Land as late as the 19th century reported seeing crocodiles in that general region.<\/p>\n<p>The description of “Leviathan” in Job 41 seems to be based on the crocodile (thus the translation of the <span>nlt<\/span>). The “dragon” of Ezekiel 29:3, used figuratively of the Egyptian pharaoh, may be a reference to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deer\">Deer<\/p>\n<p>Large ruminant (cud-chewing) animals. Only the males have antlers (branching horns). Deer antlers grow annually and are solid, in contrast to those of the antelope and the gazelle. Fully developed antlers are devoid of any covering of skin or horn and, for all practical purposes, may be regarded as a mass of dead bone carried for a certain time by the living animal.<\/p>\n<p>The end of the deer’s muzzle is naked in all species. The stomach is divided into a series of compartments, some of which are used to store partly chewed food. The food is later regurgitated, rechewed, and finally swallowed into a section of the stomach where true digestion takes place.<\/p>\n<p>Three species of deer were known in Palestine: the red deer <em>(Cervus elaphus),<\/em> the Persian fallow deer <em>(Dama mesopotamica),<\/em> and the roe deer <em>(Capreolus capreolus).<\/em> All are now extinct there. The last deer were hunted in the Holy Land in 1914. The red deer referred to in the Bible as “hart” (male), “stag” (male), or “hind” (female) stood about four feet (1.2 meters) high at the shoulder. It was gregarious (living in herds or flocks), each group remaining in a definite territory. Red deer grazed and browsed during the morning and late afternoon (Lam 1:6). The sexes remained in separate herds. The red deer was known for its leaping (Is 35:6) and sure-footedness in the mountains (Ps 18:33; Sg 2:8-9, 17; 8:14; Hb 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>The antlers of the Persian fallow deer (1 Kgs 4:23) were large, flattened, and palmated (shaped like an open palm with fingers extended), and its coat was a yellowbrown. It traveled in small groups, feeding mainly on grass in the morning and evening.<\/p>\n<p>The roe deer (Dt 14:5; 1 Kgs 4:23) was a small, graceful animal, dark reddish brown in summer and yellowish gray in winter. Its antlers were about a foot (30.5 centimeters) long and had three points. The roe deer preferred sparsely wooded valleys and the lower slopes of mountains, grazing in open grasslands. It usually associated in family groups made up of the doe and her offspring. They were shy, yet very curious. The roe deer barked like a dog when disturbed, and they were excellent swimmers.<\/p>\n<p>There is some question as to whether the roe deer is actually referred to in such passages as 1 Kings 4:23; references may be to the fallow deer, although that animal does not seem to have lived in the southern part of Palestine around the Sinai Desert because of its need for ample amounts of food and water. Fallow deer were found in northern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The hart (the male red deer) was listed among the clean beasts that Jewish law permitted as food (Dt 12:15, 22; 14:5), but deer were not listed among the animals appropriate for sacrifice. The hind (female red deer) normally gave birth to one calf at a time, though twins were born with some degree of regularity (Jb 39:1; Ps 29:9, <span>kjv<\/span>; Jer 14:5). The gestation period was about 40 weeks. When it was about to give birth, the hind looked for a secure hiding place, preferably in the dense undergrowth of the forest where it could find natural protection for the tiny calf. During the first few days after birth, the mother never went far from her young. The fawn was able to stand on its own legs a few hours after birth. The solicitous care by the hind for her calf during the first days of its life is hinted at in a touching way in Jeremiah 14:4-5, where only a severe drought is said to drive the hind from her calf. Job 39:1-4 describes the calving of the hinds. The hind illustrated grace and charm (Gn 49:21; Prv 5:19), and its dark, gentle eyes and graceful limbs were used to describe the beauty of a woman (Prv 5:18-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dog\">Dog<\/p>\n<p>Probably the earliest domesticated animal <em>(Canis familiaris),<\/em> used very early in hunting. The modern dog is believed to have come from the Indian wolf <em>(Canis lupus pallipes).<\/em> The dogs of biblical times probably looked like a modern German shepherd, with short pointed ears, a pointed nose, and a long tail.<\/p>\n<p>The dog was generally looked down upon in biblical times (Prv 26:11; 2 Pt 2:22). The biblical writers did not share modern sentiments about dogs being man’s best friends. The dog was pictured as a scavenger, haunting streets and dumps (Ex 22:31; 1 Kgs 22:38; Mt 15:26; Lk 16:21). Human corpses could become the spoil of dogs (2 Kgs 9:35-36). In general, dogs served the same function as vultures and other birds of prey. Most of the 41 references in the Scriptures to dogs show strong disfavor. Dogs were considered cowardly, filthy creatures.<\/p>\n<p>Dogs used in hunting occur in paintings in Egyptian tombs, and there is a reference to dogs herding sheep in Job 30:1. One good quality of dogs highly esteemed by the Israelites was watchfulness (Is 56:10). In general, however, in biblical times “dog” was a term of contempt (1 Sm 17:43; 2 Sm 16:9) and was used of overly submissive persons (2 Sm 9:8; 2 Kgs 8:13) and of evil persons (Is 56:10-11; Mt 7:6; Phil 3:2; Rv 22:15).<\/p>\n<p>Dogs, like pigs, were voracious and omnivorous (eating any kind of food). In response to a Gentile woman’s request that he heal her daughter, Jesus used the metaphor of throwing household food scraps to dogs (Mt 15:22-28; Mk 7:25-30). At the time of Jesus, the word “dog” was a standard Jewish term of contempt for Gentiles who, like dogs, were considered unclean, although the diminutive form of the word, used by Jesus, softened this considerably. Seeing her faith, Jesus granted the woman’s request, giving a non-Jew some of “the children’s bread.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Donkey\">Donkey<\/p>\n<p>Beast of burden. The donkey of the Holy Land <em>(Equus asinus)<\/em> was quite different from the European donkey of today, which is usually a small, stubborn animal. In biblical times the donkey was a beautiful, stately, friendly animal. Its color was usually reddish brown. Three wild races have been described, all from Africa. The race from northwest Africa is extinct; the one from northeast Africa, if not extinct, is close to extinction; the Somalian race, which survives, did not play an important part in domestication. The northeast African race, the Nubian donkey, was evidently domesticated in the Nile River region in early historic times. The donkey was used as a mount from the time of domestication on. It is first mentioned in the Bible among the animals that Abraham acquired in Egypt (Gn 12:16). The donkey was primarily a beast of burden, driven but not bridled. From the time of the Middle Kingdom on (c. 2040 <span>BC<\/span>), it was used for riding in Egypt, but only the Jews and Nubians rode donkeys regularly. The donkey was also used for threshing grain and for pulling the plow. In Arab countries today peasants plow with a donkey and a cow or camel hitched together. In Israel the law forbade plowing with a donkey and an ox hitched together (Dt 22:10). Until the time of Solomon (960 <span>BC<\/span>), horses were not used in Palestine. From that time on, the horse was ridden by warriors; the donkey was used by those who were traveling peaceably.<\/p>\n<p>The donkey was held in high regard by the Jews and was considered an economic asset. An individual had to have a donkey for minimum existence (Jb 24:3), and wealth was frequently counted by the number of donkeys one possessed (Gn 12:16; 24:35). The donkey was considered an acceptable gift (Gn 32:13-15). It was allowed to rest on the Sabbath (Dt 5:14). Women in biblical times often used the donkey as a riding animal (Jos 15:18; 1 Sm 25:23; 2 Kgs 4:24); often a special driver would help a woman guide the animal, running along at its side. If a married couple possessed only one donkey, the husband usually walked alongside while the wife rode (Ex 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>The people of Israel returning from Babylon had ten times as many donkeys as horses and camels (Ezr 2:66-67; Neh 7:68-69). Job’s wealth was indicated by the fact that he had 500 she-donkeys before catastrophe hit him (Jb 1:3); after his recovery he had 1,000 donkeys (Jb 42:12). Joseph’s brothers used donkeys to transport the grain they purchased in Egypt (Gn 42:26; 43:24). Abigail transported food on donkeys to David and his troops during their conflict with Saul (1 Sm 25:18). David assigned one of the 12 managers of his royal estates to look after his donkeys exclusively (1 Chr 27:30).<\/p>\n<p>The onager, or Syrian wild donkey <em>(Equus hemionus hemihippus)<\/em>, is an intermediate between the true horse and the true donkey. Its ears are longer than those of a horse but shorter than those of a donkey. The front hooves are narrow; there are chestnuts (callouslike spots on the inside of the knees) on the front legs only, and the tail is short haired for a long distance from its root so that it appears to be tufted.<\/p>\n<p>The Sumerians (ancient Mesopotamians) were able to domesticate the onager, which was eventually replaced by the horse. It was used to draw chariots in Ur; a number of onagers were buried with their vehicles in a royal grave that dates from about 2500 <span>BC<\/span>. Later the wild onager was a favorite hunter’s prize for Babylonian and Assyrian kings.<\/p>\n<p>The onager was very common in the steppe lands near Israel, where it was described as a freedom-loving desert animal (Jb 24:5; 39:5-8; Ps 104:11; Is 32:14; Jer 2:24; Hos 8:9). Ishmael was described as “free and untamed as a wild donkey” (Gn 16:12, <span>nlt<\/span>)—that is, one who could not adjust to domestic life. Drought seems to have been responsible for the population decline of the onager in biblical times (Jer 14:6). The modern onager <em>(Equus hemionus onager)<\/em> is slightly larger than the Syrian wild donkey that is extinct.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Dragon\">Dragon<\/p>\n<p>Any one of a number of monstrous land and sea creatures. In biblical usage, “dragon” does not refer to the huge, fire-breathing, winged reptile of European folklore. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> used the term to translate two Hebrew words that are usually rendered more precisely in modern translations. One word referred to desert animals; most scholars agree with the <span>niv<\/span> that “jackals” is its proper meaning (Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; Jer 9:11; Mal 1:3). <em>See<\/em> Jackal (below).<\/p>\n<p>The other Hebrew word translated “dragon” is harder to define. It was frequently used in reference to serpents (so translated in the <span>rsv<\/span>: Ex 7:9-12; Dt 32:33; Ps 91:13). In other <span>rsv<\/span> passages it is translated “sea monster” (Gn 1:21; Jb 7:12; Ps 148:7). The exact identity of such sea monsters is not known. Several <span>rsv<\/span> passages retain the English “dragon.” In two of them (Ps 74:13; Is 27:1), the context indicates that sea monsters are meant. In three others (Is 51:9; Ez 29:3; 32:2) “dragon” seems to refer to the crocodile, a figurative reference to the Egyptian pharaoh at the time of the exodus. Jeremiah 51:34 (translated “monster” in the <span>rsv<\/span>) may also refer to a voracious creature such as a crocodile. <em>See<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p>Babylonian myths described monsters and dragons in primordial conflict with the god Marduk; they represented the principle of evil. In its figurative usages in Scripture, “dragon” has a similar significance, especially in the prophetic books. In the book of Revelation it is a symbol of Satan, the archenemy of God and his people (Rv 12:3-17; 13:2, 4, 11; 16:13; 20:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fish\">Fish<\/p>\n<p>Aquatic animals frequently mentioned in the Bible without names or descriptions that enable us to identify the particular species. Since time immemorial, fish have constituted one of the staple foods of humanity, and they still serve as the chief source of protein in many parts of the world. The trade in fish was highly developed in biblical times. For example, one of the gates in Jerusalem was called the Fish Gate (Neh 3:3; Zep 1:10). The law in Leviticus 11:9-12 permitted the Jews to eat fish, but only those having both fins and scales. Scaleless fish such as catfish were forbidden, even though they had fins.<\/p>\n<p>Egyptian paintings depict various methods of fishing, and the Philistines fished in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the people of Israel were not a seafaring nation, it is safe to assume that most of their fish came from freshwater lakes and rivers, especially the Sea of Galilee. Some 36 species of fish have been identified in that lake, including varieties of perch, carp, barbel, “sardine,” and catfish.<\/p>\n<p>The method of fishing characteristic of NT times was the dragnet. After a boat had put out into the deep (Lk 5:4), a large net would be thrown out from it and then dragged toward shore by the rowers in the boat, possibly with the help of a crew in another boat. The catch was sorted out on shore (Mt 13:47-48). Fishing was usually carried out at night when the coolness of the water brought fish closer to the surface and when they could not see the approaching nets.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews also fished by hook and line (Mt 17:27), a few by spear (Jb 41:7), and some by the throw net (Ez 47:10). Habakkuk refers to hook-and-line fishing, netting, and seining (1:15).<\/p>\n<p>Very early in the history of the Christian church the fish became a symbol for Christ and the faith. It was scratched on the walls of Roman catacombs and may be seen today decorating walls, altars, pews, and vestments. The symbol came into use because the Greek word for “fish” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ichthus<\/span><em>)<\/em> is composed of the first letter of each word in the Greek phrase “Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.” <em>See<\/em> Whale (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Flea\">Flea<\/p>\n<p>Tiny, irritating insect (1 Sm 24:14; 26:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). Many species of fleas occur in Palestine, the most common being <em>Pulex irritans.<\/em> About a thousand species are known around the world. Fleas are wingless parasites that have sharp jaws and suck out blood from the bodies of humans and animals. The body is wedge shaped, enabling the flea to burrow into folds of skin and hide there. The eggs, laid by the female in dust heaps in the corners of rooms, hatch into small, white larvae that pupate (a nonfeeding stage) in a cocoon. Soon adult fleas appear that immediately attach themselves to the body of a host. The female requires blood for the development of her eggs.<\/p>\n<p>A flea bite is painful and causes some swelling and itching. Fleas are attracted by warmth. With favorable moisture and temperature, adult fleas can live a year or longer without food, but they are voracious feeders. The most dangerous fleas are those of the rat that transmit the organism responsible for bubonic plague. There were 41 recorded epidemics of bubonic plague before the Christian era.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fly\">Fly<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the order Diptera, which have one pair of wings. Many winged insects of other orders, however, are also called flies, such as the dragonfly or butterfly.<\/p>\n<p>As in almost all parts of the world, flies are abundant in Palestine. One of the most numerous is the common housefly <em>(Musca domestica),<\/em> found chiefly around dung heaps and garbage. The female lays her eggs, out of which emerge white maggots that feed on refuse. After a few days the maggot develops into a cocoon out of which emerges the adult housefly. In the summer the whole cycle lasts about 12 days, so that a fly can breed about 20 generations a year.<\/p>\n<p>Another fly common to Palestine is the botfly (family Oestridae). It causes much discomfort among livestock by irritating them and spreading diseases. Tabanid flies (family Tabanidae), including the horsefly (genus <em>Tabanus<\/em>) and related species, are also found in Palestine. Both the botfly and horsefly are known as gadflies because of the persistent distress they inflict. Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar is spoken of as a gadfly in view of his invasion of Egypt (Jer 46:20).<\/p>\n<p>The fourth plague in Egypt just before the exodus featured “swarms of flies” (Ex 8:21-31, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Pss 78:45; 105:31). Those swarms may have been made up of any or all the flies mentioned above. The maggots mentioned in Job 25:6 and Isaiah 14:11 and the worms in Exodus 16:24 and Job 7:5 and 17:14 were probably fly larvae.<\/p>\n<p>A proverb quoted in Ecclesiastes 10:1 probably refers to the housefly, which would be attracted to an open, perfumed ointment bottle. Once inside it would drown and eventually decay, causing the ointment to spoil and stink. The fly is also referred to in Isaiah 7:18 where it symbolizes Egypt. Isaiah may have had in mind a horsefly <em>(Tabanus arenivagus)<\/em> that attacks both humans and animals.<\/p>\n<p>Philistine inhabitants of the city of Ekron worshiped a god named Baal-zebul, meaning “Lord of the high places.” The Hebrews mockingly spoke of Baal-zebub, meaning “Lord of the flies” (2 Kgs 1:2). The NT form is Beelzebub (e.g., Mt 10:25; 12:24, 27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Fox\">Fox<\/p>\n<p>Small, doglike carnivore with a bushy tail that is about half its body length. The red fox of the Holy Land <em>(Vulpes palaetinae)<\/em> is similar to the North American red fox; it is smaller than a wolf and is normally a nocturnal solitary animal. The omnivorous fox eats almost any kind of food—fruits, plants, mice, beetles, and birds—but seldom touches carrion. It loves the sweet juice of grapes, but it also burrows underground tunnels that can destroy the vines (Sg 2:15). The fox is intelligent and known for its slyness (Lk 13:32). It has considerable endurance and can run at speeds up to 30 miles (48 kilometers) per hour. The Jews rebuilding Jerusalem’s wall were taunted by the wisecrack that even a fox jumping on their wall would knock it over (Neh 4:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Egyptian fox <em>(Vulpes niloticus)<\/em> is found in the central and southern parts of the Holy Land. It is somewhat smaller than the common red fox. Its back is rust colored and its belly light. The Syrian fox <em>(Vulpes flavescens)<\/em> that lives in the northern part of the Holy Land is shiny gold in color.<\/p>\n<p>Some OT references such as Psalm 63:10 and Lamentations 5:18 are translated “fox” in the <span>kjv<\/span> but probably refer to jackals. Jackals, not foxes, hunt in packs and tend to act as scavengers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Frog\">Frog<\/p>\n<p>Amphibian (genus <em>Rana<\/em>), living part of its life in the water and part on land.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs and toads are covered with soft, hairless skin and lack a tail in the adult stage. The hind legs are much longer and more powerfully developed than the forelegs so that the animals are able to jump large distances. It has been suggested that the frog referred to in Scripture is an edible one, <em>Rana ridibunda,<\/em> one of the aquatic frogs found in Egypt and in the stagnant waters of the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The female frog lays her eggs in the water; after about a week the eggs hatch into tadpoles. Gradually through metamorphosis the tail is lost and limbs are acquired. Frogs must maintain a moist skin since they take oxygen through the skin as well as through their lungs; thus they must always remain close to water. They feed on insects and worms.<\/p>\n<p>Frogs are found throughout the Palestinian lowlands, where their croaking is heard in the spring and on summer evenings. The Israelites seem to have associated frogs primarily with sliminess and foulness. They fell into the category of creeping or swarming creatures, which in general were ritually unclean (Lv 11:29-31). Since the frog was not specifically listed, however, rabbis did not consider it one of the animals that defiled human beings through contact.<\/p>\n<p>In Revelation 16:13 certain foul spirits are said to look like frogs. The ancient Egyptians made the frog a symbol of life and birth and an image of Heqet, the patron goddess of birth. She is depicted with a frog’s head giving life to the newborn. Thus that deity was discredited when the power of God afflicted Egypt in the second of the ten plagues on the Egyptians with the very animal that was her symbol (Ex 8:1-14; Pss 78:45; 105:30). The frog in question may have been the spotted frog of Egypt <em>(Rana punctata,<\/em> or <em>Rana ridibunda).<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gazelle\">Gazelle<\/p>\n<p>Small, dainty, graceful antelope with hollow recurved horns on both sexes. Two varieties exist in the Holy Land, the dorcas gazelle <em>(Gazella dorcas),<\/em> which is pale fawn in color and up to 22 inches (56 centimeters) tall, and the Arabian gazelle <em>(Gazella arabica),<\/em> which is a dark smoky color and up to 25 inches (63.5 centimeters) tall.<\/p>\n<p>Gazelles are still quite common throughout the desert and steppe areas of the Holy Land, especially in the Negev Desert. Herds usually consist of from 5 to 10 animals, but some varieties assemble in large migratory herds in the fall to relocate to lower elevations and new feeding grounds. Gazelles are herbivorous (plant eating). They are very shy and post guards to warn the herd of approaching danger.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical times the gazelle was probably the game animal most hunted by the Jews (Prv 6:5; Is 13:14). Pharaoh Tutankhamen hunted gazelles and ostriches. The gazelle is said to have graced Solomon’s table (1 Kgs 4:23). Gazelles were not easy to catch because of their great speed (2 Sm 2:18; 1 Chr 12:8; Prv 6:5); they surpass the deer in swiftness. They were trapped in various ways—encircled with nets, driven into enclosures with pitfalls, or forced into narrow valleys and shot with arrows. The Bedouin hunt gazelle with falcons and dogs; the falcon annoys the gazelle, striking it on the head and injuring it so that the dogs can overtake it.<\/p>\n<p>The gazelle is referred to in Song of Songs 2:9, 17; 4:5; 7:3; 8:14, where it is an image of feminine beauty.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gecko\">Gecko<\/p>\n<p>Reptile of the family Gekkonidae, referred to in Leviticus 11:30. In Jewish food law it was a ritually unclean lizard. There are seven species of geckos in the Holy Land (including <em>Hemidactylus turcicus<\/em> and <em>Ptyodactylus hasselquistii,<\/em> all insectivorous—insect eating). The gecko makes a low mourning sound by vibrating its tongue rapidly against the roof of its mouth. In legend the gecko was said to cause leprosy by crawling across a person’s body.<\/p>\n<p>Another name for the gecko is the wall lizard, so named because it can walk upside down on ceilings with the aid of the suction discs on its toes—but it often plops down into the middle of the home. Since it was considered unclean, such an intrusion would have been a disgusting nuisance to Jewish households (Lv 11:31-38).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Lizard (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Gnat\">Gnat<\/p>\n<p>Any very small fly, in common and biblical usage. According to the <span>nlt<\/span>, the third plague in Egypt before the exodus consisted of gnats (Ex 8:16-18; Ps 105:31). The <span>kjv<\/span> translates the Hebrew word there as “lice,” but the breeding pattern described in Exodus 8—insects rising from the dust—seems to fit gnats better than lice. Since “gnat” is a general term, the small flies of that plague may have included several small species such as mosquitos, harvester gnats, midges, or sand flies.<\/p>\n<p>The sand fly inflicts a far more painful bite than the mosquito. Further, it does not betray itself by a buzzing noise in flight and is so small that it penetrates most mosquito netting.<\/p>\n<p>Gnats were drawn to wine while it was fermenting. The Pharisees in particular would strain their wine to avoid consuming unclean insects (Mt 23:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Goat\">Goat<\/p>\n<p>Cloven-hooved mammals (genus <em>Capra<\/em>) with large eyes and big, floppy ears that constantly twitch. Both males and females have backward arching horns. The Palestinian goat is a ruminant (cud-chewing animal) of lighter build than the sheep.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was probably the earliest ruminant to be domesticated. Its wild ancestor seems to have been the Gezoar goat <em>(Capra aegagrus).<\/em> Wild goats are believed to have been domesticated very early in Palestine. The goat of Bible times was probably the Syrian or Mamber variety <em>(Capra hircus mambrica).<\/em> Domesticated goats may have as many as four kids in a litter, whereas wild goats bear only one or two.<\/p>\n<p>The Palestinian goat was commonly black. Speckled and spotted goats were a rarity, and for that reason Jacob’s request for those goats in Genesis 30:32 appeared very modest. There may also have been red goats (cf. 1 Sm 16:12; 19:13, where goat’s hair was used to imitate David’s hair, which was “ruddy” or auburn).<\/p>\n<p>Almost every part of the goat was used by the Israelites. The whole goat was used for sacrifice. Its flesh served as meat (Lv 7:23; Dt 14:4), and it was the principal source of milk (Prv 27:27). Goats were sheared in the late spring, and the goat hair was used for weaving tent cloth and for various domestic purposes (Ex 36:14; 1 Sm 19:13, 16). The tabernacle at Mt Sinai was made of goat’s hair blankets (Ex 26:7).<\/p>\n<p>Adult male goats were generally not eaten because of their strong flavor and toughness and also because they were necessary to insure the flock’s increase. Young kids, however, were usually the chief meat for a feast and were offered to visitors as a symbol of hospitality. Goat milk is richer than the milk of cows and sheep and evidently had broader uses. A good goat gives three quarts of milk a day, from which a rich butter and buttermilk can be made. The average Hebrew family could have lived almost entirely on a single goat’s production.<\/p>\n<p>Goatskin was tanned as leather, and the whole hide was turned into a skin bottle by sewing shut leg and neck apertures (Gn 21:14; Jos 9:4). Goatskin had many uses, including the construction of Hebrew musical instruments. The nebal, a large harp, was made with goatskin for its base sound. Drums had goatskin coverings.<\/p>\n<p>Goats were herded with sheep in biblical times, but each group remained separate following its own bell-laden leader. Jesus was evidently referring to their common herding in his description of the Last Judgment (Mt 25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Because of their wool, sheep are valued more than goats. However, where pasture and water are scarce and thorny shrubs dominate over grass, sheep are difficult to keep and goats become important. They can live under conditions that suit neither cows nor sheep, producing large quantities of milk. The goat does not supply fat as the sheep does, and since its hair is coarse its wool is rather scarce. Goat-hair cloth called cilicium was used to make tents.<\/p>\n<p>Goats have voracious appetites. They also were responsible for much damage done to the land of Palestine, breaking down terraces, destroying forests, and bringing about soil erosion by eating off all cover.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was recognized as a form of wealth, subject to the law of firstlings (Nm 18:17). It had to be eight days old before it could be offered as a sacrifice. A year-old male goat was one of the animals offered at the Passover (28:22), and two goats were offered on the Day of Atonement (Lv 16:7-10). The goat was also used for other specific sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p>The ibex, a type of wild goat <em>(Capra ibex nubiana),<\/em> still lives in small numbers on the cliffs close to the Dead Sea. That it was known in ancient times is evident from rock carvings. It is distinguished from the true wild goat by having a more compact rump and horns that are slender and curved back. Its slender legs and sharp cloven hooves enable it to cling to narrow rock ledges, to jump between them, and to climb steep cliffs.<\/p>\n<p>Usually the ibex is found in rugged mountain country among rocky crags and meadows just below the snow line (Ps 104:18). In Job 39:1 they are referred to as “mountain goats.” They frequently gather in herds of 5 to 20. They graze and browse, being active in the afternoon and sometimes feeding through the night. The large horn of the ibex was at one period made into the shofar that was blown in the second Jerusalem temple to announce the new year and the jubilee year.<\/p>\n<p>The goat was often used in a figurative and symbolic sense by the writers of the Bible: in Song of Songs 4:1 and 6:5 for the bride’s black hair; in Matthew 25:31-46 for the wicked; and in Ezekiel 34:17 and Daniel 8:5-8 for various human leaders.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Grasshopper\">Grasshopper<\/p>\n<p>Large insects of the Orthoptera order. They have chewing or biting mouth parts and two pairs of wings, the front pair of which is narrow and somewhat thickened and the hind pair membranous and used for flying. When not in use the flight wings are folded beneath the protective front wings like a fan against the body. By rubbing their wings together, male grasshoppers produce sounds that both males and females can detect. Grasshoppers pass through a partial metamorphosis; the egg hatches into a juvenile nymph that looks like an adult except for its smaller size and undeveloped wings. After several months the nymph becomes a winged adult.<\/p>\n<p>The terms “grasshopper” and “locust” are often used interchangeably. Actually the locust is a kind of grasshopper. Also confusing is the fact that other insects such as cicadas are sometimes called locusts. The difference between grasshoppers and locusts depends more on behavior than appearance. Grasshoppers are individual insects that lead solitary lives and do not migrate. The same insects when migrating in a swarm are called migratory grasshoppers or locusts. Elimination of their food supply by drought, flood, or fire may lead to migration. Climatic factors such as a warm dry winter also stimulate migrations.<\/p>\n<p>Grasshoppers and locusts have been a staple food in the Middle East and also among the Indians of the American Southwest. To the Israelites the grasshopper was considered ritually clean and could be eaten (Lv 11:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Locust (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hare\">Hare<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the genus and species <em>Lepus europaeus judaeus, Lepus capensis,<\/em> and <em>Lepus arabicus.<\/em> It is found in open country, often near or on cultivated lands, and in woods, usually deciduous rather than evergreen. It is an herbivorous rodent and is different from the rabbit, which is not found in Palestine. Although it is not a true ruminant according to modern classification (because it does not have a four-chambered stomach), the hare does rechew its food. It has a process of partial regurgitation of material too hard for the cells in the stomach to absorb initially; thus, the hare actually chews food previously swallowed.<\/p>\n<p>Near Eastern hares have very long ears and large hind feet; their feet are well furred. They are similar to American jackrabbits, which are true hares. Hares do not dig or occupy burrows the way rabbits do. Hares are mainly nocturnal and spend their inactive hours hiding in vegetation. They eat grasses and herbaceous matter as well as twigs and young bark of woody plants. Hares breed with great rapidity—the young attaining sexual maturity at six months after birth.<\/p>\n<p>The hare was ceremonially unclean (Lv 11:6; Dt 14:7), evidently because although it appeared to chew its cud, it did not have cloven hooves. Consumption of hares has also been forbidden among the Arabs, Chinese, and Lapps, but the hare was widely hunted by other people in ancient and modern times. Its great speed, prolific breeding, timidity, and caution have saved it from extermination by its many enemies.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hippopotamus\">Hippopotamus<\/p>\n<p>Large beast of problematic interpretation. Some early interpreters thought it referred to the elephant, others to the wild ox, the mammoth, or any large animal. It was called “behemoth” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. Today it is generally agreed that the reference is to the hippopotamus <em>(Hippopotamus amphibius),<\/em> a large, thick-skinned, amphibious mammal, an ungulate (having hooflike toenails) with a large head, a bulky, hairless body, and short legs.<\/p>\n<p>The description in Job 40:15-24 fits closely the modern hippopotamus (see <span>nlt<\/span>), except for the depiction of the tail. At present the hippopotamus is found only in the rivers of Africa, but there is fossil evidence that it has existed in the Holy Land, perhaps in the swamps of northern Galilee and the Jordan Valley.<\/p>\n<p>The hippopotamus has highly developed sense organs, placed in such a way that it can see, hear, and smell almost without being seen; its eyes, ears, and nostrils can reach above water while the rest of the animal lies submerged. It has a large mouth, large tusks, and a short, heavy throat. The strong legs are so short that the belly almost reaches the ground when the animal is on the land. The hippopotamus lives on plants and herbs growing in rivers, but if food is scarce there, it forages on land, usually at night. In spite of its heavy body it is surprisingly agile on land.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Horse\">Horse<\/p>\n<p>Przewalski’s horse (<em>Equus przewalskii,<\/em> an eastern race that roamed about Mongolia until modern firearms destroyed most of them after World War I) and the tarpan (a western race of southern Russia that became extinct in the Ukraine in 1851). The domesticated horse <em>(Equus caballus)<\/em> seems to have been derived from the tarpan. The original site of domestication is believed to have been Turkestan, a region north of Afghanistan and India, now in Russia. The horse differs from the donkey in that it has shorter ears, a longer mane with a forelock, a long hairy tail, and a soft, sensitive muzzle.<\/p>\n<p>Horses were used in war not only for riding but also for pulling the heavy, springless war chariots. Two kinds of horses were needed for these different purposes, and the Hebrews distinguished between chariot horses and cavalry horses.<\/p>\n\n<p>The Lord warned the early Israelites against unnecessarily amassing military strength in the form of horses and thereby following the oppressive tactics of the powerful Egyptians (Dt 17:14-16), but the demands of war caused both David and Solomon to import horses from Egypt into their kingdoms and to breed them. Solomon greatly increased the number of horses in the Jewish kingdom and maintained large stables at various cities (1 Kgs 10:26) such as the regional defense centers of Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer (1 Kgs 9:15-19). Ahab’s horses are mentioned in 1 Kings 18:5, and records of Shalmaneser III state that Ahab furnished 2,000 chariots to a coalition against Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>In early Israel, the horse was opposed as a symbol of pagan luxury and of dependence on physical power for defense (Dt 17:16; 1 Sm 8:11; Ps 20:7; Is 31:1). Horse trading, mentioned as early as Genesis 47:17, was carried on by Solomon between Egypt and the Syro-Hittite principalities (1 Kgs 10:28-29). Most biblical references to horses refer to their use in war, but horses were also used for transportation. Riding seems to have been less popular than the use of chariots. Cavalry units were not introduced until the 12th century <span>BC<\/span> by the Medes. Joseph rode in Pharaoh’s second horse-drawn chariot (Gn 41:43), and Absalom made a display by riding a horse-drawn chariot (2 Sm 15:1). Naaman traveled by horse and chariot (2 Kgs 5:9). Later, horses were so common in Jerusalem that the royal palace had a special horse gate (2 Chr 23:15), and a gate of the city itself was known as the Horse Gate (Neh 3:28; Jer 31:40). Mordecai rode a royal horse of King Xerxes as a sign of honor (Est 6:8-11). Horses are often spoken of figuratively (Ps 32:9; “mare,” Sg 1:9; “stallions,” Jer 5:8; 12:5), especially in the context of judgment (Hb 3:8; Zec 1:8; 6:1-8; Rv 6:2-8; 9:17; 19:11-16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Warfare; Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Hyena\">Hyena<\/p>\n<p>Stocky carnivore <em>(Hyaena hyaena)<\/em> with coarse hair, an erect mane, and long hairs along the neck and back. Hyenas live in holes among rocks and banks. They are mainly nocturnal but are ordinarily neither noisy nor aggressive. Their cry, however, is a disagreeable, unearthly sound. Hyenas usually feed on carrion, crushing bones with their powerful jaws. If the carrion supply is inadequate, they will kill sheep, goats, or other small animals. When threatened, hyenas growl and erect their mane, but they rarely fight. They are massively built with forelegs longer than the hind legs.<\/p>\n<p>Known as scavengers in Africa, hyenas eat domestic refuse in the villages. In Palestine the striped hyena is a common predator, preferring rocky territory and even rock tombs. Since hyenas were notorious for raiding the graves of the dead, all Israelites who could afford it arranged for burial in tombs protected by massive stone doors. Absalom, King David’s son who was killed by Joab in the wild, was buried under a huge pile of stones to protect his corpse from molestation by hyenas (2 Sm 18:17).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Jackal\">Jackal<\/p>\n<p>Carnivore <em>(Canis aureus)<\/em> smaller than the true wolf and with a shorter tail. It is similar to the fox but has a broader head, shorter ears, and longer legs. The fox is solitary; the jackal tends to be gregarious. Its tail can be drooping or erect, compared with the long horizontal tail of the fox. Jackals usually prowl at night, either singly, in pairs, or in packs through open savannah country. They eat small mammals, poultry, fruit, vegetables, and carrion. They spend their days in thickets and clumps of vegetation. Often they obtain scraps from kills by larger carnivores. Jackals can run at speeds of about 33 miles (53 kilometers) per hour.<\/p>\n<p>The jackal can reach a height of about 20 inches (51 centimeters), roughly the size of a German shepherd dog. Its back is pale yellow with dark, almost black, flanks. Its lips are black and its ears white on the inside. The howl of the jackal sounds like the crying of a child or the heartrending wail of the bereaved (Mi 1:8; cf. Jb 30:29). To other jackals the howl is merely an invitation calling the pack together for its nocturnal hunting.<\/p>\n<p>OT references are chiefly to jackals prowling around ruined cities and wilderness areas (Neh 2:13; Ps 44:19; Is 13:22; 34:13; 35:7; Jer 9:11; 14:6; 49:33; 51:37; Lam 4:3; 5:18; Mal 1:3). Many such references are translated “dragon” in the <span>kjv<\/span>, but “jackal” is more appropriate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leech\">Leech<\/p>\n<p>Segmented worm (class Hirundinea) up to five inches (12.7 centimeters) long with a flat body equipped with suction pads at each end. The mouth, located at the bottom of the front suction pad, has three teeth that the leech uses to pierce the skin of its host. The leech feeds on blood, and its glands secrete an anticoagulant to prevent the blood from clotting. The ordinary medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis) is abundant in springs and ponds from the Negev Desert to Galilee. It adheres to the bodies of human beings and animals that submerge themselves in water, injects its anticoagulant, and sucks their blood.<\/p>\n<p>The reference in Proverbs 30:15 is uncertain (see <span>nlt<\/span>) but may be to the parasitic and greedy nature of the horse leech (genus <em>Haemopis<\/em>). The small horse leech enters its host’s mouth and nostrils from water while the animal is drinking. A leech weighing one-half ounce (14.2 grams) has been known to gorge itself with two and a half ounces (71 grams) of concentrated blood and then to exist for 15 months with no more to eat.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leopard\">Leopard<\/p>\n<p>Called <em>Panthera pardus tulliana,<\/em> it is the most widespread of all the large wildcats. In rocky areas it lives in caves, but in forested regions it lives in thick vegetation. In OT times many lived in the vicinity of Mt Hermon (Sg 4:8).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is somewhat smaller than the tiger, measuring up to 5 feet (1.5 meters) in length with a tail of about 30 inches (.8 meter). Its body is better proportioned than that of the tiger. The leopard takes its victim by surprise from a silent ambush, often concealing itself near villages or watering places and waiting for its prey, remaining in one spot for long spans of time. The leopard is swift on the ground (Hb 1:8), agile in trees, and very graceful in its movements. Its color is yellowish speckled with black spots (Jer 13:23). Daniel and John saw visions in which leopards were symbols of world powers (Dn 7:6; Rv 13:2).<\/p>\n<p>The leopard is a wary and cunning animal, formidable and ferocious (Jer 5:6; Hos 13:7; cf. Is 11:6). The leopard is dangerous not only to domestic animals but also to humans. With its natural camouflage it can hide on the forest floor, blending into the changing light and shadows. The Israelites were terrified of the leopard because it constantly ravaged their sheep and goats. Several biblical place names suggest that they were known for the leopards in their vicinity: Nimrah, Beth-nimrah, and Nimrim, a district northeast of the Dead Sea. It has survived in the Holy Land into the present century; a few leopards still exist in remote areas near Mt Tabor and Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Leviathan\">Leviathan<\/p>\n<p>Sea monster mentioned several times in the Bible (Pss 74:14; 104:26; Is 27:1, <span>nlt<\/span>). It may refer to any of the larger marine animals such as large jellyfish, whales, or sharks, or to a large reptile like the crocodile. Some scholars think “Leviathan” may refer to animals now extinct, such as ichthyosaurs and plesiosaurs (marine reptiles similar to dinosaurs). The scriptural term might also refer to certain dinosaurs that spent part of their lives half-submerged in shallow lakes and oceans. Other scholars believe that most of the references are to the crocodile.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crocodile (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lion\">Lion<\/p>\n<p>Large, tawny-colored carnivore <em>(Panthera leo)<\/em> that preys chiefly on hoofed mammals and charges by a series of leaps and bounds. Within historic times the lion ranged in Africa, Europe, and the Holy Land. In ancient times the territories of the African and Persian lions met in the Middle East. The lion of the Holy Land was the Asiatic or Persian lion <em>(Panthera leo persica).<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The males have heavy manes that stop at the shoulders but cover much of the chest. The Persian lion cannot climb and is mainly nocturnal, returning to its lair or a thicket by day (Jer 4:7; 25:38; Na 2:11-12). This lion is about 5 feet (1.5 meters) long with a tasseled tail 30 inches (.8 meter) or so long; its shoulders may reach a height of 35 inches (.9 meter). It is one of the smallest of the lion breeds.<\/p>\n<p>Lions are usually found in pairs, though sometimes in larger numbers. A small group is known as a pride. They generally prefer open country but in Palestine evidently prowled the subtropical vegetation of the Jordan River valley. Lions, which usually hunt at dusk, kill smaller animals by a blow of the paw, larger ones by a bite in the throat. A lion does not remain in the same place for more than a few days. The animal is in its prime at about seven years of age, when it weighs from 400 to 600 pounds (181.6 to 272.4 kilograms).<\/p>\n<p>The lion does not characteristically attack humans, though like other great cats it may become a man-eater (1 Kgs 13:24-28; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25-26; Ps 57:4; Dn 6:7-27). Ordinarily, it attacks only out of great hunger or in self-defense. A very young lion that attacks humans can become dangerous if it develops a taste for human flesh. A very old lion, expelled from the pride because it can no longer keep up in the pursuit of antelope or gazelles, may choose humans as a relatively slow-moving prey.<\/p>\n<p>A lion generally roars only on a full stomach—that is, after it has consumed its prey (Ps 22:13; Ez 22:25; Am 3:4). Nevertheless, its roaring arouses fear (Am 3:8; 1 Pt 5:8). The lion is a bold (2 Sm 17:10; Prv 28:1), destructive animal (Ps 7:2; Jer 2:30; Hos 5:14; Mi 5:8), and the enemy of flocks (Am 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Lions were common in biblical times in all parts of the Holy Land. Hebrew has at least seven words for lion and young lion. The lion is referred to about 130 times in the OT—more than any other wild animal. Lions were evidently much less common in NT times. After gradually declining, they became extinct in Palestine shortly after <span>AD<\/span> 1300. The lion was present in Mesopotamia, however, until the end of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>Lions played an important part in the political and religious symbolism of the Near East (1 Kgs 10:19-20). In Assyria and Babylonia the lion was regarded as a royal beast (Dn 7:4). Oriental monarchs maintained artificial lion pits as places of execution (Ez 19:1-9; Dn 6:7-16). Animals for these were captured in camouflaged nets or pits. To the Jews, the lion was the mightiest of beasts (Prv 30:29-31). Thus, it symbolized leadership (Gn 49:9-10; Nm 24:9) and hence eventually became a title for Christ (Rv 5:5). It was also the ensign of Judah’s tribe and was used by King Solomon in the decoration of his house and the temple.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Lizard\">Lizard<\/p>\n<p>Reptiles of the suborder Lacertilia. Their skin is covered with scales. The lizard is a useful creature because it captures harmful insects and worms. Like other reptiles, it lays eggs with shells softer than those of a bird and with no clear division between the yolk and the white. Lizards are “cold-blooded” organisms without a temperature-maintenance mechanism; hence, they become inactive in cold weather.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards can survive in barren parched countryside. In the Near East they are encountered in great numbers in the Arabian Desert, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Judean wilderness. There may be as many as 44 different species of lizards in the Holy Land.<\/p>\n<p>The Dabb lizard (genus <em>Uromastyx<\/em>), which attains a length of about 24 inches (61 centimeters), is found in the Negev Desert. It is omnivorous, an unusual trait since most lizards are insectivorous. It has a hard, rough skin, green with brown spots; a short, rounded head; and a powerful tail encircled with a row of strong spines that it uses as a weapon of defense.<\/p>\n<p>Lizards are listed as ceremonially unclean in Jewish law (Lv 11:29-31). The fact that lizards crawl on their bellies made them unclean. Contact with a lizard’s carcass defiled a law-abiding Jew (Lv 11:32-36). The <span>nlt<\/span> translates the “lizards” of Leviticus 11 as “great lizard,” “gecko,” “monitor lizard,” “sand lizard,” and “chameleon.” The monitor lizard is a large lizard that lives in the deserts of southern Palestine, Sinai, and Egypt. It is up to 55 inches (1.4 meters) long with a long snout and sharp teeth. Other translators and commentators render the original Hebrew in a wide variety of ways, including “tortoise,” “ferret,” “lizard,” “snail,” “mole,” and even “water hen.” The fact that most of the original Hebrew words occur only once in Scripture makes it very difficult to be certain about their appropriate translation.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gecko (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Locust\">Locust<\/p>\n<p>An insect of the family <em>Acridiidae.<\/em> It is referred to by at least 12 different names in Scripture. The various Hebrew words may refer to different stages of its development from larva to adult or to the type of damage that it causes. Locusts are characterized by swarming and mass migration. In modern times they have caused extensive and disastrous destruction to vegetation. Grasshoppers do not swarm or migrate en masse, differentiating them from the true locusts.<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions several different species of locusts. Leviticus 11:22 seems to refer to the slant-faced (bald) locust and also to the katydid, or long-horned grasshopper. The reference in Deuteronomy 28:42 may be to the mole cricket. In Joel 1:4 and 2:25 and in Nahum 3:16-17, successive stages of the insect’s development are described. The cutting locust (<span>kjv<\/span> “palmerworm”) of Joel is probably the first instar (stage of development), the swarming locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “locust”) are middle stages, and the hopping locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “cankerworm”) later instars but not yet fully matured insects. In the adult stage, called destroying locusts (<span>kjv<\/span> “caterpillar”), the color of the locust is reddish brown, which turns to yellow with a brownish network on the wings.<\/p>\n<p>Only three of the hundreds of varieties of locusts found in Bible lands are capable of multiplying into great swarms, and only the desert locust <em>(Schistocerca gergaria)<\/em> can be considered widespread in all the Bible lands. The desert locust is native to the Sudan (Africa). It is a little over two inches (5 centimeters) long and has a wingspread of some five inches (12.7 centimeters). It shows two phases, a solitary phase and a gregarious phase, with a possible third phase known as transiens. There are differences in the immature and adult forms of the phases in color and physiology.<\/p>\n<p>The quantity and distribution of rains are important factors in the extent of swarming. Moist soil is needed for depositing the eggs and permitting them to develop. Each female deposits from one to six egg pods, containing 28 to 146 eggs each. The larvae emerge in 15 to 43 days.<\/p>\n<p>In the gregarious phase (from the second stage of metamorphosis onward), the locust is driven by a strong wandering instinct. Masses of them form a random procession of overflowing locust bodies that ignore any obstruction. They swarm over everything (Jl 2:4-9). The only regulator of their activities is temperature; they are immobilized by high or low temperatures. Taking to wing they may move 1,200 miles (1,930.8 kilometers) from their native home. They fly in compact formations large enough to blot out the light of the sun. Their movement seems to be controlled by hormones, but the direction is influenced by the wind. The swarms consume almost every plant in their path, sparing only the carob, sycamore, castor tree, and oleander bush.<\/p>\n<p>A locust plague was one of the most severe evils to come upon the ancient world (Dt 28:38). Joel 2:1-11 describes a locust plague in graphic terms, using it as a symbol of God’s destroying judgment. Special days of prayer, fasting, and trumpet blowing were prescribed to remove locust plagues (1 Kgs 8:37-38; 2 Chr 6:28-29; Jl 2:12-17). Locusts symbolized powerful and merciless enemies that completely destroyed the earnings of human toil (Jgs 6:5; Is 33:4; Jer 46:23; 51:27; Na 3:15).<\/p>\n<p>Bedouins eat locusts raw, roasted, or boiled, preserving them by drying and threading. They are also crushed and ground, and the grist used in cooking or eaten with bread, sometimes mixed with honey and dates. Such was the diet of John the Baptist (Mk 1:6). The Greeks ground locusts in stone mortars to make flour of them.<\/p>\n<p>The ancients considered the two large hind legs, or jumping legs, as separate limbs and had a special name for them. Hence locusts were described as having four legs, a reference to the four smaller walking legs. “Going on all fours” thus referred to creeping or walking as opposed to jumping and did not mean that the unclean insects had only four legs in all. Because of its two hind jumping legs, the locust was exempted from the prohibition against unclean insects (Lv 11:20-23).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Plagues upon Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mole\">Mole<\/p>\n<p>Rodent <em>(Spalax ehrenbergi)<\/em> from six to nine inches (15 to 23 centimeters) long, which burrows in any area where the soil is suitable for digging; it should be called a mole rat. Common in the Holy Land, large numbers are found in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:20 refers to the mole, as does Leviticus 11:29-30 (<span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The mole rat has no tail and is molelike in appearance, but neither true moles nor shrews have ever been found in the Holy Land. The mole rat’s teeth are strong and protruding like those of a squirrel. The neck is short and thick with a plump body shaped like a sausage. The short legs have broad paws with claws adapted for burrowing. The fur is soft, thick, and ashen gray. Its ears and almost sightless eyes, which are no larger than poppyseeds, are hidden in the fur. Folklore taught that touching a mole rat would result in blindness.<\/p>\n<p>In the wet winter season the mole rat builds breeding mounds resembling those of pocket gophers. It builds less complex resting mounds in the summer, although both have rather elaborate tunnel systems. The mole rat feeds on roots, bulbs, tubers, and various other subterranean plant parts, often doing extensive damage to agriculture.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Moth\">Moth<\/p>\n<p>Insect of the genus <em>Tineola<\/em> that lays its eggs on wool or furs, its larvae feeding on those materials. The destructive qualities of moths are referred to in several biblical passages (Jb 13:28; Ps 39:11; Is 50:9; Hos 5:12; Mt 6:19-20; Lk 12:33; Jas 5:2). In Isaiah 51:8 “worm” (<span>nlt<\/span>) refers specifically to the larva of the clothes moth. The moth symbolizes disintegration, decay, and weakening. It is only the larvae that do the damage. The adult is quite harmless and feeds mainly on the nectar of flowers. It is easily crushed (Jb 4:19). The clothes moth reproduces in May or June. It enters human dwellings in the evening. A week after the eggs are laid the larvae appear and immediately begin their work of destruction, eating anything within reach made of animal fibers.<\/p>\n<p>The moth’s destructive activity is done in secret without any sound and without any dramatic appearance, such as a swarm that blots out the sun. In an age when wealth was counted more in possessions than in money, and when among those possessions wool clothing was highly valued, moths could literally cause economic disaster; hence the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 6:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>There are hundreds of species of moths other than the clothes moth in the Holy Land; they are harmless to leaves, flowers, fruit, trees, and seeds. As with the clothes moth, the larvae inflict the damage.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mouse\">Mouse<\/p>\n<p>Rodent of the family Muridae, especially genus <em>Mus.<\/em> The mouse was regarded as unclean because, being short legged, it was considered one of the creeping creatures (Lv 11:29). Mice known as commensals live in dwellings and tend to have longer tails and to be darker in color than wild mice, which are active chiefly at night. Mice are good climbers and even good swimmers. Wild mice eat many kinds of vegetation, including seeds, fleshy roots, leaves, and stems. At times they store food.<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word for “mouse” (Lv 11:29; 1 Sm 6:4-5; Is 66:17) is probably a general term for various rats and mice. The root meaning of the Hebrew word “mouse” is “destruction of corn,” a reference to the damage mice do to field crops. At least 23 varieties of mouselike rodents are known in the Holy Land. They cause food spoilage, damage household articles, and transport the host fleas that spread typhus, spotted fever, and bubonic plague. Plague bacteria may have caused the tumors or swellings among the Philistines (1 Sm 6:5). Isaiah 66:17 refers to a pre-exilic Canaanite cultic practice in which mice were eaten; the reference may actually be to the hamster. A number of rodents are eaten by Arabs of the Near East; the gerbil is considered a special delicacy. <em>See<\/em> Mole (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Mule\">Mule<\/p>\n<p>Hybrid offspring of a male ass and a female horse <em>(Equus asinus mulus),<\/em> ordinarily sterile. The offspring of a female donkey and a stallion (male horse) is known as a hinny and is of little value because of its inferior size.<\/p>\n<p>Because crossbreeding was forbidden in the law (Lv 19:19), the Israelites procured mules from the Gentiles, perhaps from the Phoenicians, since Tyre (a Phoenician seaport in what is now southern Lebanon) imported horses and mules (Ez 27:14). Mules did not appear in Israel until David’s reign (2 Sm 13:29), possibly because of the rarity of horses among the Hebrews. Mules were used chiefly by members of the royal court and by other nobles. King David rode on a mule, and Solomon rode to his inaugaration on King David’s mule (1 Kgs 1:33). Absalom met his death riding on a mule (2 Sm 18:9). Mules were less common than horses, camels, and asses in the postexilic community (Ezr 2:66). In antiquity Asia Minor was especially noted for breeding fine mules.<\/p>\n<p>Mules have long enjoyed a reputation for obstinacy, but that trait is not mentioned in the Bible. The mule is prized for riding and for carrying heavy burdens, especially in warm mountainous regions. They are sure-footed and thrive best in hot, dry climates. The mule has the frugality, endurance, and steady gait of an ass along with the size, strength, swiftness, and courage of a horse. Mules are almost never sick. They live longer than horses. They can carry a load of up to 300 pounds (136 kilograms) as far as 30 miles (48.3 kilometers) a day.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Travel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Pig\">Pig<\/p>\n<p>Most properly, newborn swine. “Swine” is technically the better name for the species, but it is rarely used in common speech today. The domestic pigs of the Middle East derived from the wild pig <em>(Sus scrofa).<\/em> The pig is the most prolific and abundant supplier of meat and fat for food. A thick layer of fat just under the skin is especially pronounced in domestic breeds. Pigs cannot be driven, so they are of value only to the settled farmer. The Hebrews were originally a nomadic people; therefore, they had little use for an animal closely associated with settled life. An Egyptian prince of about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>, however, is recorded as owning a herd of 1,500 swine.<\/p>\n<p>The pig is clumsily built, yet lively and able to move with agility and speed. The most conspicuous characteristic of the pig is a truncated, mobile snout terminating in a disc-shaped surface on which the nostrils are located. Most pigs have large tusks in both jaws which grow continuously in life. The tusks of the upper jaw are unique in that they curve upward instead of pointing downward as in most animals. The excrement of a pig has an almost unbearable odor, which clings not only to the pig itself but also to swineherds, who can be identified a long way off.<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were never raised in the Holy Land by Jews. The great herd into which Jesus drove the unclean spirits was encountered in the land of the Gadarenes, a non-Jewish area east of the Jordan. The Gadarene demons took refuge in a herd of pigs feeding on a bluff overlooking the Sea of Galilee (Mt 8:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>Wild pigs were found in the Holy Land as in many countries today. Psalm 80:13 refers to the destructiveness of a wild boar (the male, or hog) attacking growing crops. A party of wild boars can destroy an entire vineyard or a field of crops in a single night. They devour, trample, and ravage everything within reach.<\/p>\n<p>Boar hunts were common in ancient Mesopotamia. Wild boars do not attack unless molested, but they are dangerous when aroused. They travel in bands of from 6 to 50 and are most active in the evening and early morning hours. The body is covered with stiff bristles and usually some finer hair, but the body covering is often quite scanty. Wild pigs are mainly vegetarian, feeding on roots, nuts, grains, and plant stems. Wild boars were particularly abundant in the mountainous regions of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, in the Jordan River valley, and in wooded sections such as Mt Tabor.<\/p>\n<p>Strict Jews would not even mention swine by name but would always substitute the term “the abomination.” Israelites considered themselves polluted if they were even touched by a swine’s bristle. To the Jews, the pig symbolized filth and ugliness. Pigs will eat fecal material, vermin, rodents, carrion, and the like (2 Pt 2:22). Proverbs 11:22 refers to the incongruity of a golden ring in the nose of an animal showing such characteristics. A similar metaphor occurs in Jesus’ statement about casting pearls before swine (Mt 7:6). The prodigal son’s degeneration was shown by his being forced in his poverty to feed pigs and eat their food (Lk 15:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>Eating the flesh of pigs was forbidden to the Jews (Lv 11:7; Dt 14:8). The Canaanites in the Holy Land killed and ate pigs freely. In intertestamental times Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), a Syrian king whose territories included Israel, used the pig to “Hellenize” the Jews. He first tested their loyalty to the Jewish faith by requiring the consumption of pork, considered a delicacy by the Greeks (2 Macc 6:18). The act of desecration that drove the Jews to rebellion, however, was the sprinkling of pig blood on the temple altar in a sacrifice to Zeus (1 Macc 1:47).<\/p>\n<p>Pigs were frequently used in pagan worship (Is 65:4; 66:3, 17), which may account for their being forbidden to the Jews as food. Evidence in the Holy Land shows that pigs were sacrificed long before Hellenistic times. Pig bones were found in a grotto below the rock-cut place of sacrifice at Gezer. A similar underground chamber with vessels containing piglet bones at Tirzah dates to the middle Bronze Age (about 2000 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Alabaster fragments of a statuette of a pig ready to be sacrificed have been unearthed. Swine were sacrificed to Aphrodite (Venus) in Greece and Asia Minor. In addition, pigs were sacrificed in connection with oaths and treaties; in the <em>Iliad,<\/em> Agamemnon sacrificed a boar to Zeus and Helios. So it is not surprising that among the Jews the pig became a symbol of filthiness and paganism.<\/p>\n<p>It is possible that eating pork was forbidden primarily because the pig may carry many worm parasites such as trichina, though that is also true of some “clean” animals. Another reason for forbidding their consumption may have been that pigs eat carrion. Some people are allergic to pork in hot weather—another suggested reason behind the Jewish taboo. The same taboo exists among the Muslims and existed in certain social strata in Egypt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Porcupine\">Porcupine<\/p>\n<p>Rodent, <em>Hystrix cristata,<\/em> which lives in forested areas, rocky hills, ravines, and valleys. The porcupine is still found in the Holy Land today. It has long quills that can be raised to give the appearance of a crest. It is almost entirely nocturnal. It burrows by day into a natural cavity or crevice. The Old World porcupine rarely climbed trees, although the New World porcupine frequently does. A porcupine may weigh as much as 60 pounds (27.2 kilograms). It eats fruit, bark, roots, and other vegetation, and carrion as well. Although its flesh is edible, the porcupine was not classed among the clean animals for the Israelites. The reference in Isaiah 34:11 (<span>rsv<\/span>) is probably to the porcupine, as is Isaiah 14:23 in the <span>nlt<\/span>. <em>See<\/em> Hedgehog.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Scorpion\">Scorpion<\/p>\n<p>Arthropod of the same group as spiders (arachnids). A dozen species of scorpions (order Scorpionida) are found in the Holy Land, but 90 percent of the scorpions are yellow scorpions, usually three to five inches (7.6 to 12.7 centimeters) long. The rock scorpion, also common to the Holy Land, is as thick as a man’s finger and from five to seven inches (12.7 to 17.8 centimeters) in length. Scorpions are slow, nocturnal invertebrates that rest beneath stones by day and prey on insects and other arachnids by night. At the end of its long tail the scorpion carries a poisonous sting that is fatal to most prey and extremely painful to humans (Rv 9:3, 5, 10; cf. 1 Kgs 12:11, 14). Scorpions symbolize Ezekiel’s evil countrymen (Ez 2:6) and the demonic forces of Satan (Lk 10:19). The scorpion is referred to as frequenting the Sinai Desert (Dt 8:15).<\/p>\n<p>A scorpion has from six to eight eyes. It has eight legs like a spider and two lobsterlike claws with which it catches and holds its prey. It feeds particularly on locusts and beetles. In many species the female scorpion eats the male after mating. Scorpions lay eggs that hatch very shortly after laying. Scorpions prefer warmer climates, and because of their desire for warmth, enter houses, especially at night, hiding in beds, blankets, footwear, and clothing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sheep\">Sheep<\/p>\n<p>Domestic animal, <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> referred to directly or by some term such as ewe, lamb, ram, or by some fact concerning them over 700 times in Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>Sheep represented the chief wealth and total livelihood of pastoral peoples, providing food to eat, milk to drink, wool for the making of cloth, and hides and bones for other uses. In addition, the sheep was a medium of exchange and a sacrificial animal. The number of sheep raised in ancient times was prodigious. Mesha, king of Moab, paid a tribute annually of 100,000 lambs and the wool of 100,000 rams (2 Kgs 3:4). The Israelites took 250,000 sheep from the Hagrites (1 Chr 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>Sheep shearing was often done for festivals (2 Sm 13:23). The sheep was held down on its side and its legs were tied together; then it lay docilely while its wool was clipped (Is 53:7). Sheep reserved for burnt offerings were not shorn; nothing could be held back from a sacrifice to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Wool had to be processed before it could be used for clothing. First it was washed, sometimes while still on the sheep, then carded and perhaps weighed for the market. The spinning of wool was regarded as a woman’s work (Prv 31:19), but weaving the spun thread into cloth on a loom was primarily a man’s occupation.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible reports that Abel kept sheep (Gn 4:2). The first sheep to be domesticated was probably the argali <em>(Ovis ammon),<\/em> a variety of the urial <em>(Ovis vignei),<\/em> a mountainous species still existing in Turkestan and Mongolia. Five breeds had reached Mesopotamia by 2000 <span>BC<\/span>; all were of the urial stock.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep known in Israel was the broad-tailed sheep <em>(Ovis orientalis vignei<\/em> or <em>laticaudata),<\/em> of which the tail weighs from 10 to 15 pounds (4.5 to 6.8 kilograms) and has always been considered a delicacy. Thus the Lord asked for this choice part as a sacrifice (Ex 29:22-25).<\/p>\n<p>Only the ram of the broad-tailed sheep has horns, but in other varieties of sheep in the Holy Land the ewe also has horns. The horns, two to three inches (5 to 8 centimeters) in diameter, can be potent weapons. Rams’ horns could be used as trumpets (Jos 6:4) or as oil containers (1 Sm 16:1).<\/p>\n<p>Although the sheep is very similar to the goat, it is differentiated by a lower forehead, its angulated spiral horns marked with transverse wrinkles and curved slightly outward, its covering of wool, and its lack of a “goatee.” Most sheep are white (Ps 147:16; Is 1:18; Dn 7:9; Rv 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>The flesh of sheep was a luxury in the biblical culture. King Solomon required a daily provision of 100 sheep for his table (1 Kgs 4:23), but the common people ate lamb or mutton only on festive occasions. A young ram was usually chosen because the ewes were more important to the future prospects of the herd. The meat was boiled in large caldrons. The milk of the sheep is extremely rich; in biblical times it was usually allowed to curdle before drinking. Possibly some Israelites kept lambs in their houses as pets (2 Sm 12:3-4).<\/p>\n<p>To protect the flock at night against predatory attacks, the shepherd tried to provide a fold. In meadows near villages, folds were built and watchmen were hired to relieve the shepherds. The shepherds of the nativity story were out in the field (Lk 2:8); they had no fold but probably had set up a tent for shelter, consisting simply of goat-hair blankets spread across sapling supports. The scarcity of springs in the Holy Land made the watering of the flock a crucial problem for the shepherd (Gn 13:8-11).<\/p>\n<p>Wild mountain sheep, varieties of <em>Ovis orientalis,<\/em> are known in the Mediterranean area (Dt 14:5). The Deuteronomy passage (<span>kjv<\/span> “chamois”) might also refer to <em>Ovis traelaphus,<\/em> a sheep about five feet high (1.5 meters) with long, curved horns. Another possibility is the Barbary sheep that lives in small flocks in rugged mountain areas in Barbary, Egypt, and Mt Sinai. The true chamois is unknown in Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The sheep is also used figuratively in Scripture. The ram represented great strength and fittingly symbolized Medo-Persia in Daniel’s vision (Dn 8:3). It is the nature of sheep to be gentle and submissive (Is 53:7; Jer 11:19), defenseless (Mi 5:8; Mt 10:16), and in constant need of guidance and care (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36). Such qualities are regarded as desirable in the lives of believers in Christ; hence the many figurative references to sheep in the NT and to Jesus as shepherd (Mk 6:34; Jn 10:1-30; Rom 8:35-37; Heb 13:20-21; 1 Pt 2:25). The resurrected Christ told the apostle Peter to “feed my lambs” and “tend my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snail\">Snail<\/p>\n<p>Invertebrate gastropods (mollusks). Land snails are very numerous in the Near East. Some freshwater forms serve as hosts for the schistosome worm, the fluke parasite causing the dread disease bilharzia (schistosomiasis).<\/p>\n<p>Purple dyes of all shades were highly valued in the ancient world. A royal purple dye was obtained from secretions of a sea snail <em>(Murex trunculus<\/em> and <em>Murex brandaris).<\/em> Evidently, that process was developed by Phoenicians, Egyptians, and Assyrians as early as 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The “purple” fishermen had their own guild during the time of the Roman Empire. The snails were harvested during the fall and winter seasons; in the spring, when egg laying took place, little dye was available. The snails tended to remain concealed in the summer. They inhabited the waters off Crete and Phoenicia. Tyrian purple, produced in the Phoenician city of Tyre, the center of the purple-dye industry, was obtained by a double dyeing. Large deposits of murex shells from dyeing operations have been found along the Mediterranean shoreline. The Israelites had to import purple goods (Ez 27:16). Lydia was a “seller of purple” or of cloth so dyed (Acts 16:14). Purple was a sign of distinction, royalty, and wealth (cf. Ex 25:4; 28:5-6, 15; Nm 15:38; 2 Chr 2:7; Est 8:15; Prv 31:22; Sg 3:10; Ez 27:7; Dn 5:7).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 30:34-35 refers to “onycha,” which was an important ingredient of incense. Onycha is the horny, clawlike operculum (the plate that closes off the opening of its shell when a snail is retracted) of a Near Eastern member of the molluskan family Strombidae. The operculum is sometimes used for offense or locomotion as well as for defense. When burned, the operculum gives off a sharp, strong scent, and when mixed with more fragrant but less powerful substances is even more potent. The name “onycha” is derived from a Greek word <em>(onyx)<\/em> for a fingernail or a claw.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Snake\">Snake<\/p>\n<p>Various species of snake, suborder Ophidia (Serpentes). In the Bible nine Hebrew words and four Greek ones refer to snakes. The most common Hebrew word is onomatopoeic—that is, it is an imitation of a snake hissing or of the sound it produces as it scrapes its scales along the ground (cf. Jer 46:22). Many types of snakes lay eggs (Is 59:5), although some retain the eggs in the body until ready to hatch.<\/p>\n<p>Snakes are among the most widespread reptiles and are found on all continents except Antarctica; they decrease in numbers and species toward the poles but increase as one approaches the equator. Thirty-three species of snakes are known in Palestine and neighboring countries, 20 of which are poisonous. Two dangerous characteristics of the snake noted by biblical writers are its inconspicuous way of moving and the ease with which it hides itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many snakes are able to swallow animals several times their own diameter because of their unusually flexible jaw mechanism. They lack not only legs but also movable eyelids. Snakes periodically shed their skins. The tongue is actually a hearing apparatus sensitive to airborne vibrations and probably to heat waves.<\/p>\n<p>The venom of poisonous species is a clear, thin secretion, transmitted to the victim’s bloodstream by means of fangs. Two types of venom are known: that of the vipers, which affects respiration and disintegrates red blood cells, and that of the cobras, which paralyzes the nervous system.<\/p>\n<p>The “asp” referred to in the Bible is probably the cobra; the “adder” is the viper. The “cockatrice” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is probably the adder. Serpents were associated with worship in Canaanite religion and symbolized evil deities among many other peoples. Steles (upright stones bearing inscriptions) have been unearthed at several sites in the Holy Land and Syria depicting a god or worshiper with a snake winding about the legs or body. Because the Israelites were burning incense in pagan worship of Moses’ bronze serpent (Nm 21:8-9), King Hezekiah destroyed it in his religious reform (2 Kgs 18:4).<\/p>\n<p>Although snakes have been an object of veneration in some religions, in the Judeo-Christian tradition snakes represent evil and, more specifically, the devil. That association began in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:1-15) and is also found in the book of Revelation (12:9; 20:2-3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adder (above); Asp (above).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Spider\">Spider<\/p>\n<p>Animal of the order Araneida. Between 600 and 700 different species inhabit the Holy Land. Spiders are different from insects in that, like scorpions, they have four pairs of legs instead of three. Spiders are equipped with poison glands—the effectiveness varying from species to species. A few can kill only insects, but others can also kill birds and mice.<\/p>\n<p>Most spiders have a pair of spinnerets attached to silk glands on the underside of the abdomen; from them a web is extruded. In the Bible the spider’s web is referred to as a symbol of frailty and insecurity (Jb 8:14; Is 59:5-6).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sponge\">Sponge<\/p>\n<p>Simple marine animals, phylum Porifera. The term “sponge” also refers to those animals’ skeletal remains. The sponge has a porous body composed of tubules and cells.<\/p>\n<p>Sponge fishing was well known in the Mediterranean area in ancient times. It was practiced particularly along the Anatolian and Syrian coasts. Sponges were harvested by divers. The use of sponges in absorbing liquids is referred to in the Bible (Mt 27:48; Mk 15:36).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Unicorn\">Unicorn<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Wild Ox (below).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wasp\">Wasp<\/p>\n<p>Insects of the family Vespidae. Hornets are social wasps that build large aerial apartment houses in which 1,000 or more individuals may live. In the Bible the hornet is used as a metaphor for God’s use of military forces (Ex 23:28; Dt 7:20; Jos 24:12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Whale\">Whale<\/p>\n<p>Largest of all living creatures, including those that have become extinct. Whales are air-breathing mammals of the order Cetacea.<\/p>\n<p>Two varieties of whales visit the shores of the Holy Land at times. The finback whale <em>(Balaenoptera physalus)<\/em> weighs about 200 tons (181 metric tons) and lives mainly in the Arctic region but sometimes passes through the Straits of Gibraltar to reach the eastern Mediterranean Sea. It feeds on small marine organisms that it strains through its whale bone; it does not have teeth. The finback whale’s esophagus is narrow.<\/p>\n<p>The sperm whale <em>(Physeter catodon),<\/em> about 60 feet (18.3 meters) long, has a curiously shaped head that looks like a battering ram. The teeth in the lower jaw of the male sperm whale are about seven inches (17.8 centimeters) long. It feeds on big fish, even on sharks. It has a large throat opening.<\/p>\n<p>Whales are referred to in Genesis 1:21 and Job 7:12 (<span>kjv<\/span> only). The “great fish” of Jonah 2:1 need not have been a whale but could have been a large shark, such as the whale shark <em>(Rhineodon),<\/em> which grows 70 feet (21.3 meters) long and lacks the terrible teeth of other sharks. Whatever the actual marine organism, Jonah’s deliverance was miraculous. The Greek word for “whale” is sometimes used as a general term for “sea monster” or huge fish and may be used in that sense in Matthew 12:40.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WildOx\">Wild Ox<\/p>\n<p>Large, fierce, fleet, intractable animal <em>(Bos primigenius).<\/em> It had a long, lean rump with a straight back and a long, narrow head. The animal described in Job 39:9-12 is clearly the wild ox. The two horns (Dt 33:17), its outstanding characteristic, were straight and as long as the head (Nm 23:22; 24:8; Ps 22:21). Kings often symbolized their dominion by wearing a helmet with two wild ox horns (cf. Pss 92:10; 132:17-18). The horns were often used as drinking vessels by the Israelites; some were large enough to hold four gallons (15 liters).<\/p>\n<p>Hunting the wild ox was a favorite sport of Assyrian kings. Tiglath-pileser I hunted it in the Lebanon Mountains about 1100 <span>BC<\/span> (cf. Ps 29:6). At one time the animal referred to in Job 39:9-12 was thought to be the oryx or antelope because of the similarity between the Hebrew word in Job and the Arabian name for oryx. The translators of the <span>kjv<\/span> called the wild ox a “unicorn” because of representations found on Babylonian mosaics and Egyptian drawings. Those representations showed it in strict profile, showing only one horn—hence, “unicorn.” Jerome’s Vulgate, a Latin Bible translation (fourth century <span>AD<\/span>) and Martin Luther’s German version translated it similarly.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Wolf\">Wolf<\/p>\n<p>Large doglike mammal <em>(Canis lupus)<\/em> that travels in bands of up to 30 animals. From the nose to the rump, the wolf measures about 3 feet (.9 meter); its drooping tail is about 18 inches (.5 meter) long. It looks much like a skinny German shepherd dog. The grayish yellow pelt is coarse and short haired.<\/p>\n<p>Wolves hunt singly or in relays, usually at night (Jer 5:6). Wolves have acute hearing and sight but rely chiefly on scent and usually catch their prey in a swift, open chase. The wolf has a reputation for boldness, fierceness, and voracity (Gn 49:27; Hb 1:8). It commonly kills more than it can eat or drag away and thus is known for its greediness.<\/p>\n<p>The wolf is a restless animal, always on the move; hunger drives it from one place to another in constant search of new hunting grounds. During spring and fall, wolves usually roam singly or in pairs, whereas in summer they may travel in family groups. In winter, several such groups may join to form a large pack. Wolves are intelligent, social creatures, faithful to their own kind. They mate for life. Individually, the wolf is a rather timid animal; it would much rather avoid human beings. But collectively wolves can be among the most dangerous animals alive.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt, Rome, and Greece the wolf was considered sacred. Wolves were well known in the Holy Land and are still found there and also in many places in Asia Minor. Shepherds continually battled with wolves that plundered their flocks (Jn 10:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible refers to wolves in a literal sense in only three places (Is 11:6; 65:25; Jn 10:12), all other references being figurative. Usually the wolf is a symbol of enemies or the wicked (e.g., Ez 22:27; Zep 3:3; Acts 20:29). Both the wolf’s courage and its cruelty were probably in the mind of the patriarch Jacob when he predicted the fate of Benjamin’s tribe (Gn 49:27).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Worm\">Worm<\/p>\n<p>Actually insect larvae in most biblical references, usually maggots, the larvae of flies (see Fly, above). For example, maggots are evidently referred to in accounts of worms feeding on spoiled manna (Ex 16:19-20), corpses (Jb 21:26; Is 14:11), or open wounds (Jb 7:5). Mark 9:48 refers to a maggot that eats dead flesh. In Acts 12:23 a fatal, worm-induced abdominal disease of King Herod is mentioned. In other cases, the reference is to the larvae of other insects (Is 51:8). In Deuteronomy 28:39 and Jonah 4:7 the vine weevil <em>(Cochylis ambiguella)<\/em> is probably referred to; it destroys vines by boring into their stems. Comparing a man to a worm is a metaphor for abasement (Jb 25:6; Ps 22:6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","summary_en":"ANIMALS In biblical usage, all members of the animal kingdom. Animals are mentioned throughout the Bible from Genesis to Revelation. Animals figured in many important biblical events, including the Creation, the fall of man, the Flood, the ten plagues in Egypt, the Hebrew worship system, and the life of Jesus Christ. The people of both OT and NT times lived close to the land and were well acquainted with various animals so that the scriptural writers and Jesus himself frequently used animals ...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55303,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","summary_en":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82929,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","summary_en":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110555,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","summary_en":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138181,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:25","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:25-26<\/strong> The woman was from <em>Syrian Phoenicia<\/em> and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","summary_en":"7:25-26 The woman was from Syrian Phoenicia and therefore a Gentile. The urgency and intensity of the woman’s petition is seen in her falling at Jesus’ feet and begging.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":14822,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Greek Greece","title_en":"Greek Greece","content_ro":"<h3>GREECE, GREEK<\/h3>\n<p>The biblical references to Greece and the Greek people are often ambiguous. In the OT some references have been understood to mean Greece or the Greeks. Javan, the fourth son of Japheth in the “table of nations” (Gn 10), seems to fit a Greek identification (1 Chr 1:5, 7; Is 66:19; Ez 27:13). The name Greece occurs clearly in Daniel 8:21; 10:20; 11:2; and Zechariah 9:13, and Greeks are mentioned in Joel 3:6. In the NT the term “Greek” appears to have the special sense of Hellenist, that is, Jews living in Hellenistic cities (Acts 6:1; 9:29; 11:20). The term in John 12:20, Acts 14:1, and 16:1-3 seems to refer to Greeks specifically. But often in the NT the term “Greek” was used for non-Jews because the Jews recognized only Jews and non-Jews. Hence the term was virtually synonymous with Gentiles (Rom 1:16; 10:12; 1 Cor 1:22, 24; Gal 2:3; 3:28). Sometimes the term “Greek” refers to the language (Jn 19:20; Acts 21:37; Rv 9:11). The use of the term “Greek” for the Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26) may be a cultural term. In Acts, references are made to Greeks in the synagogues as observers. These may have been Greeks as such, although certainty is not possible (Acts 14:1; 17:4; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Greek homeland comprised the southern end of the Balkan Peninsula. But at times Greek speakers were to be found in the islands of the Aegean Sea, western Asia Minor, south Italy, and Sicily.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEmergenceofGreekCulture\">The Emergence of Greek Culture<\/p>\n<p>After the Persian Wars ended (497 <span>BC<\/span>), Athens entered into a remarkable period of greatness. Athens was rebuilt and its port of Piraeus was fortified. When the Athenian citizens embarked on a course of unbridled democracy, chaos seemed to threaten, but Pericles, a brilliant leader, restored the equilibrium of the state and Athens soon regained her glory. Vast buildings were erected on the Acropolis, notably the Parthenon (dedicated to Athena, the goddess of Athens). Athens became wealthy, partly from the contributions to the Delian League. Athenian sea power grew. There were present in Athens an abundance of slaves, artisans, craftsmen, foreign traders, artists, poets, philosophers, teachers, actors, athletes, scientists, physicians, historians, religious teachers, and experts in military and naval affairs. The great writers of the fifth and early fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span> included dramatists like Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripedes, historians like Thucydides and Herodotus, and philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. There occurred a flowering of art and architecture. It was a golden age of spectacular achievement in art, thought, literature, and architecture.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAgeofHellenism\">The Age of Hellenism<\/p>\n<p>The great glory of Athens withered before the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> was over. Philip of Macedon, with ambitions of empire, drove west, and by 338 <span>BC<\/span> Athens and Thebes were overwhelmed—Greece became united into a Macedonian Empire. Philip was assassinated in 366 <span>BC<\/span>, but Alexander, his son, educated in the Athenian tradition, took up his father’s work and before his own death in 323 <span>BC<\/span> had conquered Persia and reached to the Punjab in India. In the end he exerted his control from the Caucusus to the Libyan Desert and the borders of Ethiopia as well. On the death of Alexander, his vast territories were divided among four generals. After some adjustments three divisions emerged—Egypt under Ptolemy; Asia Minor, Syria, and the East under Seleucus; and Macedonia under Antigonus.<\/p>\n<p>Finally the whole of the Greek area came under the control of the Romans, who moved into Greek areas in 198 <span>BC<\/span> and over the years established a number of Roman provinces, such as Achaia (Acts 18:12). It was into the world of Hellenism, now under Rome, that the Christians moved with the message of the gospel in the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGreeksinPalestine\">The Greeks in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Excavations have shown that there was contact between Palestine and the Aegean areas over many centuries. From the middle Bronze period (the patriarchal age), middle Minoan II pottery has been found at a number of sites. The Philistines, who formed part of the Sea Peoples in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>, settled in areas of coastal Palestine and developed their own culture there, leaving a great deal of their distinctive pottery. During the period around 1370–1200 <span>BC<\/span>, various peoples from the Aegean and western Asia Minor found their way to Palestine. Mycenaean pottery has been found in a number of sites. From a later period still, numerous examples of Attic black-figure ware from the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, and Attic red-figure ware from the period around 530–300 <span>BC<\/span>, have been found in excavations. Silver coins struck in imitation of Attic drachmas come from the same period. With the rise of Hellenism and the occupation of Palestine by the Ptolemaic and Seleucid rulers, Greek influence increased greatly. The presence of Greek pottery, like Rhodian jars, and the influence of Greek architectural features in buildings emphasize the significance of the Greek influence in Palestine as well as throughout the Levant region and the hinterland. With the coming of the Romans, these influences continued. Greek was the language of commerce. Indeed, the NT was written in the Greek of ordinary people, and a wide variety of Greek inscriptions has come to light from Roman times.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alexander #1; Alexandria; Hellenism; Hellenists; Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GREECE, GREEK<\/h3>\n<p>The biblical references to Greece and the Greek people are often ambiguous. In the OT some references have been understood to mean Greece or the Greeks. Javan, the fourth son of Japheth in the “table of nations” (Gn 10), seems to fit a Greek identification (1 Chr 1:5, 7; Is 66:19; Ez 27:13). The name Greece occurs clearly in Daniel 8:21; 10:20; 11:2; and Zechariah 9:13, and Greeks are mentioned in Joel 3:6. In the NT the term “Greek” appears to have the special sense of Hellenist, that is, Jews living in Hellenistic cities (Acts 6:1; 9:29; 11:20). The term in John 12:20, Acts 14:1, and 16:1-3 seems to refer to Greeks specifically. But often in the NT the term “Greek” was used for non-Jews because the Jews recognized only Jews and non-Jews. Hence the term was virtually synonymous with Gentiles (Rom 1:16; 10:12; 1 Cor 1:22, 24; Gal 2:3; 3:28). Sometimes the term “Greek” refers to the language (Jn 19:20; Acts 21:37; Rv 9:11). The use of the term “Greek” for the Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26) may be a cultural term. In Acts, references are made to Greeks in the synagogues as observers. These may have been Greeks as such, although certainty is not possible (Acts 14:1; 17:4; 18:4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Greek homeland comprised the southern end of the Balkan Peninsula. But at times Greek speakers were to be found in the islands of the Aegean Sea, western Asia Minor, south Italy, and Sicily.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEmergenceofGreekCulture\">The Emergence of Greek Culture<\/p>\n<p>After the Persian Wars ended (497 <span>BC<\/span>), Athens entered into a remarkable period of greatness. Athens was rebuilt and its port of Piraeus was fortified. When the Athenian citizens embarked on a course of unbridled democracy, chaos seemed to threaten, but Pericles, a brilliant leader, restored the equilibrium of the state and Athens soon regained her glory. Vast buildings were erected on the Acropolis, notably the Parthenon (dedicated to Athena, the goddess of Athens). Athens became wealthy, partly from the contributions to the Delian League. Athenian sea power grew. There were present in Athens an abundance of slaves, artisans, craftsmen, foreign traders, artists, poets, philosophers, teachers, actors, athletes, scientists, physicians, historians, religious teachers, and experts in military and naval affairs. The great writers of the fifth and early fourth centuries <span>BC<\/span> included dramatists like Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripedes, historians like Thucydides and Herodotus, and philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. There occurred a flowering of art and architecture. It was a golden age of spectacular achievement in art, thought, literature, and architecture.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAgeofHellenism\">The Age of Hellenism<\/p>\n<p>The great glory of Athens withered before the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> was over. Philip of Macedon, with ambitions of empire, drove west, and by 338 <span>BC<\/span> Athens and Thebes were overwhelmed—Greece became united into a Macedonian Empire. Philip was assassinated in 366 <span>BC<\/span>, but Alexander, his son, educated in the Athenian tradition, took up his father’s work and before his own death in 323 <span>BC<\/span> had conquered Persia and reached to the Punjab in India. In the end he exerted his control from the Caucusus to the Libyan Desert and the borders of Ethiopia as well. On the death of Alexander, his vast territories were divided among four generals. After some adjustments three divisions emerged—Egypt under Ptolemy; Asia Minor, Syria, and the East under Seleucus; and Macedonia under Antigonus.<\/p>\n<p>Finally the whole of the Greek area came under the control of the Romans, who moved into Greek areas in 198 <span>BC<\/span> and over the years established a number of Roman provinces, such as Achaia (Acts 18:12). It was into the world of Hellenism, now under Rome, that the Christians moved with the message of the gospel in the first century <span>AD<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGreeksinPalestine\">The Greeks in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Excavations have shown that there was contact between Palestine and the Aegean areas over many centuries. From the middle Bronze period (the patriarchal age), middle Minoan II pottery has been found at a number of sites. The Philistines, who formed part of the Sea Peoples in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>, settled in areas of coastal Palestine and developed their own culture there, leaving a great deal of their distinctive pottery. During the period around 1370–1200 <span>BC<\/span>, various peoples from the Aegean and western Asia Minor found their way to Palestine. Mycenaean pottery has been found in a number of sites. From a later period still, numerous examples of Attic black-figure ware from the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, and Attic red-figure ware from the period around 530–300 <span>BC<\/span>, have been found in excavations. Silver coins struck in imitation of Attic drachmas come from the same period. With the rise of Hellenism and the occupation of Palestine by the Ptolemaic and Seleucid rulers, Greek influence increased greatly. The presence of Greek pottery, like Rhodian jars, and the influence of Greek architectural features in buildings emphasize the significance of the Greek influence in Palestine as well as throughout the Levant region and the hinterland. With the coming of the Romans, these influences continued. Greek was the language of commerce. Indeed, the NT was written in the Greek of ordinary people, and a wide variety of Greek inscriptions has come to light from Roman times.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Alexander #1; Alexandria; Hellenism; Hellenists; Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GREECE, GREEK The biblical references to Greece and the Greek people are often ambiguous. In the OT some references have been understood to mean Greece or the Greeks. Javan, the fourth son of Japheth in the “table of nations” (Gn 10), seems to fit a Greek identification (1 Chr 1:5, 7; Is 66:19; Ez 27:13). The name Greece occurs clearly in Daniel 8:21; 10:20; 11:2; and Zechariah 9:13, and Greeks are mentioned in Joel 3:6. In the NT the term “Greek” appears to have the special sense of Hellenis...","summary_en":"GREECE, GREEK The biblical references to Greece and the Greek people are often ambiguous. In the OT some references have been understood to mean Greece or the Greeks. Javan, the fourth son of Japheth in the “table of nations” (Gn 10), seems to fit a Greek identification (1 Chr 1:5, 7; Is 66:19; Ez 27:13). The name Greece occurs clearly in Daniel 8:21; 10:20; 11:2; and Zechariah 9:13, and Greeks are mentioned in Joel 3:6. In the NT the term “Greek” appears to have the special sense of Hellenis...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22921,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lebanon","title_en":"Lebanon","content_ro":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEBANON<\/h3>\n<p>Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">l-b-n<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the snow that lay on the mountains for six months of the year (Jer 18:14).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>At the southern end the Lebanon ranges are a direct continuation of the hills of northern Galilee, with Mt Hermon (Sirion, Senir) very prominent in the Anti-Lebanon range, rising to 9,230 feet (2,813.3 meters). The two ranges are divided by a broad valley, the valley of Lebanon (Jos 11:17) or “the entrance of Hamath” (Nm 34:8), the modern Beqa’a.<\/p>\n<p>In the south the Lebanon range is separated from the Galilee hills by a deep east-west gorge through which the Litani River flows, entering the Mediterranean just north of Tyre. In its upper courses it follows the Beqa’a Valley in a northeasterly direction almost to Baalbek. The Lebanon ridge, about 100 miles (160.9 kilometers) long, stretches north to the east-west valley of the Nahr el-Kebir and is marked by a series of peaks. In the south are Gebel Rihan, Tomat, and Gebel Niha (ranging from 5,350 feet to nearly 6,230 feet, or 1,636.7 to 1,898.9 meters, high) east of Sidon. In the center lie Gebel Baruk, Gebel Kuneiyiseh, and Gebel Sunnin (7,220 feet, 6,890 feet, and 8,530 feet high, or 2,200.7 meters, 2,100.1 meters, and 2,599.9 meters high, respectively) east of Beirut. Further north, to the east of Tripoli, lies Qurnet es-Sauda, which reaches 9,840 feet (2,999.2 meters), and Qurnet Aruba, about 7,320 feet (2,231.1 meters) high.<\/p>\n<p>These high mountains trap the rain coming from the Mediterranean, providing both the mountain areas and the coastal strip below with good rainfall; beyond the mountains, the rainfall drops. It is along the coastal strip between the mountains and the sea that the Phoenicians flourished and towns like Tyre, Zarephath, Sidon, Berytus (Beirut), Byblos (Gebal), and Tripoli were established. The coastal area has a number of headlands that are extensions of the mountain range. The coastal road had to be cut around or through these spurs. A good example is the headland of Nahr el-Kelb, a little to the north of Beirut.<\/p>\n<p>On the east side of the Lebanon range is the Beqa’a Valley. The Orontes River rises in the north of this valley and flows north to enter the Mediterranean north of ancient Ugarit. This whole valley region was known in classical literature as Coele-syria (Hollow Syria). It was the “breadbasket” of the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>To the east of the Beqa’a Valley is the Anti-Lebanon range, in which the Barada River rises and flows east toward the fertile oasis of Damascus. Mt Hermon, in the southern part of the range, was known as Sirion by the Phoenicians and Senir by the Amorites (Dt 3:9).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Resources\">Resources<\/p>\n<p>Lebanon was famous in antiquity for its rich forests of fir and cedar. The coastal areas, the Beqa’a Valley, and the lower slopes of the mountains were suitable for olive trees, fruit trees, and vineyards, as well as some grain crops. One important product came from the sea: a mollusk of the gastropoda class from which a red or purple dye was obtained. The name “Phoenician” derived from the Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">phoinos<\/span><em>,<\/em> red-purple. Wool dyed purple was available in Ugarit about 1500 <span>BC<\/span>. The Phoenicians had a monopoly on this industry for centuries. The people of Israel, who used a great deal of purple dye in their tabernacle furnishings (Ex 26) and the garments of their priests (Ex 28:4-6; 39:1, 28-29), probably obtained the dye from the Phoenicians.<\/p>\n<p>King Solomon had significant trading relations with Phoenicia. To build the temple in Jerusalem, cedar and fir were obtained from Hiram I of Tyre (1 Kgs 5:6, 9, 14; 7:2; 10:17, 21; 2 Chr 2:8, 16). Solomon paid for this timber in wheat and olive oil (1 Kgs 5:11). The trees were floated down by sea to a point in Solomon’s domain and transported from there to Jerusalem. Cedar and fir trees from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon provided ships for Tyre (Ez 27:5), sacred barges and furniture for Egypt, and timber for building the second temple in Jerusalem (Ezr 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>From the ports of Lebanon, the Phoenicians traded with many lands. They mastered the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were used in peace and in war. A vivid picture of the trading activities of traders from Tyre, Sidon, Gebal, and Arvad is given in Ezekiel 27, where the extent and nature of their trade is given in considerable detail.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<p>The area became of interest to the Egyptians during the fourth dynasty (c. 2600 <span>BC<\/span>) when Pharaoh Snofru acquired 40 shiploads of cedar from Lebanon. Byblos fell under Egyptian influence during the 12th dynasty (c. 1980–1800 <span>BC<\/span>) and Egyptians gave golden ornaments in exchange for cedar. During the 18th dynasty (c. 1552–1306 <span>BC<\/span>), Egypt conquered Syria, and the records speak regularly of cedar being taken as tribute. Later an envoy of Ramses XI named Wenamon paid dearly for the cedar (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>When Egyptian power waned, the Assyrians controlled the area and took vast quantities of cedar as tribute from the days of Tiglath-pileser I (c. 1100 <span>BC<\/span>) onward. Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian nation likewise controlled Lebanon and took away large quantities of cedar to build temples and palaces. The spoiling of Lebanon’s forests was spoken of by Isaiah (Is 14:8) and Habakkuk (Hb 2:17). In later centuries Lebanon passed successively under the domination of Persians, Greeks, and Romans.<\/p>\n<p>In NT times the towns of Tyre and Sidon are generally coupled together (Mt 15:21; Mk 3:8; 7:24, 31; Lk 6:17; 10:13-14; Acts 12:20), though sometimes they are referred to alone (Acts 21:3, 7). A Greek woman who was a Syro-Phoenician is referred to in Mark 7:26. Jesus preached in these areas during his ministry. In biblical poetry the tall cedars of Lebanon were a symbol of majesty and strength (Jgs 9:15; 2 Kgs 14:9; Pss 92:12; 104:16; Is 35:2; 60:13). They were also a symbol of earthly pride that would be broken before the wrath of God one day (Ps 29:5; Is 2:13; 10:34; Jer 22:6; Ez 31:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","summary_en":"LEBANON Region mentioned only in the OT, although its towns, including Tyre and Sidon, are named in the NT. The name Lebanon generally refers to the double range of mountains that commences near Tyre and runs northeast following the Mediterranean coast. The two Lebanon ranges are parallel to one another, Lebanon to the west and Anti-Lebanon to the east. The name Lebanon is derived from the Hebrew root l-b-n, meaning “white,” which may reflect either the white limestone of the mountains or the...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27064,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nations","title_en":"Nations","content_ro":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","summary_en":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36570,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Syrophoenicia*","title_en":"Syrophoenicia*","content_ro":"<h3>SYROPHOENICIA*<\/h3>\n<p>Homeland of the Greek woman who approached Jesus in the region of Tyre and Sidon and pleaded with him to cast a demon out of her daughter (Mk 7:26). The region of Phoenicia was located in the Roman province of Syria. Perhaps the designation of Syrophoenicia was used so as not to confuse this woman’s country with the Phoenicia of North Africa called Libyphoenicia. In a parallel passage, this woman is identified as a Canaanite, a name by which Phoenicians called themselves (Mt 15:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SYROPHOENICIA*<\/h3>\n<p>Homeland of the Greek woman who approached Jesus in the region of Tyre and Sidon and pleaded with him to cast a demon out of her daughter (Mk 7:26). The region of Phoenicia was located in the Roman province of Syria. Perhaps the designation of Syrophoenicia was used so as not to confuse this woman’s country with the Phoenicia of North Africa called Libyphoenicia. In a parallel passage, this woman is identified as a Canaanite, a name by which Phoenicians called themselves (Mt 15:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SYROPHOENICIA* Homeland of the Greek woman who approached Jesus in the region of Tyre and Sidon and pleaded with him to cast a demon out of her daughter (Mk 7:26). The region of Phoenicia was located in the Roman province of Syria. Perhaps the designation of Syrophoenicia was used so as not to confuse this woman’s country with the Phoenicia of North Africa called Libyphoenicia. In a parallel passage, this woman is identified as a Canaanite, a name by which Phoenicians called themselves (Mt 15...","summary_en":"SYROPHOENICIA* Homeland of the Greek woman who approached Jesus in the region of Tyre and Sidon and pleaded with him to cast a demon out of her daughter (Mk 7:26). The region of Phoenicia was located in the Roman province of Syria. Perhaps the designation of Syrophoenicia was used so as not to confuse this woman’s country with the Phoenicia of North Africa called Libyphoenicia. In a parallel passage, this woman is identified as a Canaanite, a name by which Phoenicians called themselves (Mt 15...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":55304,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","summary_en":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82930,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","summary_en":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110556,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","summary_en":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138182,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:27-28<\/strong> Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of <em>first<\/em> did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the <em>Jews<\/em> (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the <em>dogs<\/em> as well. (In Jewish literature, Gentiles were frequently referred to as dogs, which were seen as filthy scavengers rather than as adorable pets; see also study note on Rev 22:15.) The woman’s persistence and acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>Lord<\/em> were rewarded.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","summary_en":"7:27-28 Jesus’ reply to the woman seems like a harsh refusal, but their interaction indicates that he wanted to see her faith (cp. Matt 15:28). • Jesus’ use of first did not exclude her as a Gentile from the grace of God but indicated that his mission was first to the Jews (Acts 13:46; Rom 1:16). The woman responded to Jesus’ words with humility and faith. She acknowledged the priority of the Jewish people but argued that there was more than enough food for the dogs as well. (In Jewish litera...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":12968,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Furniture","title_en":"Furniture","content_ro":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","summary_en":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":55305,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","summary_en":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82931,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","summary_en":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110557,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","summary_en":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138183,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:29-30<\/strong> For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","summary_en":"7:29-30 For similar healings from a distance, see Matt 8:5-13 \/\/ Luke 7:1-10 and John 4:46-54.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"30":[{"id":12959,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Furniture","title_en":"Furniture","content_ro":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FURNITURE<\/h3>\n<p>Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinOldTestamentTimes\">Palestine in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references to beds in the OT, using at least three Hebrew nouns. Jacob is pictured as sitting up in bed (Gn 48:2) and as dying on his bed (49:33). Moses threatened that frogs would invade the bedroom and bed of the Egyptian pharaoh (Ex 8:3). Michal, Saul’s daughter, placed an effigy in David’s bed (1 Sm 19:11-17) when Saul sent messengers to capture him there. King David condemned the practice of killing a defenseless person sleeping in bed (2 Sm 4:7, 11). The prophet Elijah laid a dead boy on his bed and revived him (1 Kgs 17:19).<\/p>\n<p>King Ahab sulked on his bed (1 Kgs 21:4), and King Ahaziah lay on his sick bed (2 Kgs 1:4-6, 16). The prophet Amos criticized the rich who lay on beds of ivory and stretched out on their couches (Am 6:4). The prophet Ezekiel spoke symbolically of disobedient Jerusalem as a prostitute sitting on a stately couch with the Lord’s incense and oil on a table nearby (Ez 23:41). Isaiah promised that the righteous would rest in their beds (Is 57:2) and also spoke of the unrighteous setting their beds among false worshipers (vv 7-8). The psalmist flooded his bed with tears (Ps 6:6), and Proverbs refers to a sluggard on his bed (Prv 26:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Table” in the OT refers both to the temple table for the bread of the Presence and to the table used in the palace or home for meals or banquets. King Adoni-bezek had his captives scrambling for scraps under his table (Jgs 1:7). Jonathan’s disabled son Mephibosheth was allowed to sit at David’s table (2 Sm 9:7, 10-13; 19:28). Solomon’s table is described several times (1 Kgs 2:7; 4:27). The queen of Sheba was particularly impressed by the food and table service in Solomon’s palace (10:5). The prophets frequently refer to tables (Is 21:5; 28:8; 65:11; Ez 40:39-43). The few references to chairs describe people reclining at meals and indicate couches rather than actual chairs (Am 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous mentions of thrones, including those of the pharaoh (Gn 41:40; Ex 11:5), David (2 Sm 3:10; 7:13), Solomon (1 Kgs 10:18), the kings of Israel and Judah (1 Kgs 22:10), and God (1 Kgs 22:19; Pss 9:4, 7; 11:4; 93:2). The OT writers sometimes indicate thrones decorated with ivory (1 Kgs 10:18).<\/p>\n<p>The exact character of furniture in Palestine is difficult to determine. Bas-reliefs and wall paintings are more common among Israel’s neighbors. Excavations in Jericho, however, have unearthed some valuable archaeological clues. Tombs of the middle Bronze Age produced reasonably well-preserved tables, stools, and boxes, making possible a study of ancient joinery methods. A variety of small trinket boxes show evidence of bone inlay and incised decoration. Some large slabs of timber may have been beds. Although primarily Canaanite styles, the furniture reflects the household furniture used in Israel in the centuries to follow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GreekandRoman\">Greek and Roman<\/p>\n<p>Historians are quite informed about Greek furniture because of the abundance of decorated vases, bas-reliefs, bronze and terra-cotta statuettes, and literary descriptions. That archaeological evidence indicates that Greek furniture was influenced by preceding civilizations. The picture is generally one of comparative simplicity, far removed from the cluttered and crowded rooms of later civilizations.<\/p>\n<p>The Greeks made several types of seats: (1) the throne, often with a back, legs of various shapes, and armrests; (2) the lighter curved-back chair with arm supports; (3) the four-legged stool; (4) the folding stool with crossed legs traceable to Egyptian models; and (5) the bench. Representations that regularly appear on monuments dating from the eighth to the second century <span>BC<\/span> link Greek chairs to Egyptian and Assyrian prototypes.<\/p>\n<p>Greeks used couches for sleeping and for reclining at meals. Footstools were used to rest the feet or as a step up to higher couches. Like chair legs, couch legs varied in style. Some were carved in the shape of animal legs, some were turned, some were rectangular. From about the sixth century <span>BC<\/span>, the legs projected above the frame. Such projections later became headboards and footboards. In Hellenistic times these headrests and footrests were carved and carried bronze medallions in high relief depicting children, satyrs, and animals. Turned legs replaced the rectangular ones. Couches were normally in wood, although bronze and marble couches are known.<\/p>\n<p>Tables were used during meals to hold dishes and food and were removed after the meal. They were made of wood, bronze, and marble and normally had four legs, but three-legged tables were occasionally used. Chests, large and small, served to store clothes, jewelry, and other articles. They were normally of wood, although some were bronze.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Rome\">Rome<\/p>\n<p>Roman furniture continued many Greek patterns. The eruption of the volcano Vesuvius in <span>AD<\/span> 79 preserved actual pieces of Roman furniture in its lava flow.<\/p>\n<p>Chairs with backs were heavier than their Greek counterparts and widely used. There were several types of stools: the folding stool, mostly wooden, though sometimes metal; and a newly developed decorative stool, often of bronze, that was supported by four curved legs ornamented with scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>A variety of couches were in use. Some followed Greek models, but others were of Roman invention. Excellent examples of bronze bed frames have been preserved. Presumably, interlaced strips of leather or cords were stretched crisscross on the frame. Gold, silver, tortoiseshell, bone, and ivory decoration were used along with veneer work in rare timber. Later, couches in Italy and in other lands had high backs and sides. The Romans seem to have used tables more widely than Greeks. They appear often as permanent supports for vases and other possessions. Tables were normally rectangular with four legs, but table makers also constructed some with three legs, or even resting on a single support. Round tabletops and legs of animals became popular from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span> on. Plain, undecorated wooden tables and benches were used in kitchens and workshops. Outdoor tables were usually of marble with carved animal legs or decorative figures of animals and monsters.<\/p>\n<p>There were various chests and boxes in daily use. Shelves and cupboards became much more popular than in Greek times.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PalestineinNewTestamentTimes\">Palestine in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The nature of furniture in the NT is probably best understood in relation to contemporaneous Roman models. The NT refers to beds in several passages. People brought a paralytic lying on his bed to Jesus (Mt 9:2, 6; Lk 5:18). When the apostles went into Solomon’s portico, people brought the sick to them on beds (Acts 5:15). A Syro-Phoenician woman’s sick child lay on a bed (Mk 7:30). Jesus spoke of setting a lamp on a stand and not placing it under a bed (Mk 4:21; Lk 8:16), and described what would happen to people in bed when the Day of the Lord came (Lk 17:34). In another parable Jesus spoke of a needy person begging for bread at midnight from a friend who was already in bed with his family (Lk 11:7). Beds of the poor and sick were probably only pallets or mattresses (Mk 6:55; Jn 5:8). When people reclined at meals, they would have been lying on a couch (Jn 13:23).<\/p>\n<p>There are numerous NT references to tables. Jesus mentioned crumbs falling from a rich man’s table (Mt 15:27; Mk 7:28; Lk 16:21). Jesus overthrew the money changers’ tables in the temple (Mt 21:12; Mk 11:15). Jesus sat with his disciples at a table for the Passover meal (Lk 22:21) and promised his disciples that they would sit at his table in God’s kingdom. The apostles were relieved of serving tables in order to preach (Acts 6:2).<\/p>\n<p>The household lamp is referred to a number of times (Mt 25:1; Mk 4:21). Terra-cotta domestic lamps have been found in abundance in excavations.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","summary_en":"FURNITURE Items of material culture used in homes, palaces, and temples. Because of its close geographical proximity to other nations, Israel had extensive contact with neighboring cultures. Historical surveys document parallels between the furniture of Israel and that of other tribes and countries. Palestine in Old Testament Times OT passages supply most of the information about furniture in ancient Palestine, although there are also significant archaeological data. There are many references...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"31":[{"id":4561,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Beth-Shean* Beth-Shan","title_en":"Beth-Shean* Beth-Shan","content_ro":"<h3>BETH-SHAN, BETH-SHEAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Strategic Palestinian town located in the subtropical Jordan Valley 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) south of the Sea of Galilee and 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) west of the Jordan River. Beth-shan (alternately Beth-shean) stood at the eastern end of the valley of Jezreel, guarding an important Jordan River crossing. It lay at the junction of two trade routes, one leading north toward Galilee and Damascus, the other leading from the mountains of Gilead west through the Jezreel Valley and the hills of Samaria.<\/p>\n<p>When the Philistines defeated Israel under King Saul at the battle on Mt Gilboa, Beth-shan was a Philistine city. The slain bodies of Saul and his sons were hung in disgrace on the city wall, and Saul’s head was displayed in the temple of Dagon, a Philistine deity (1 Sm 31:10-13; 2 Sm 21:12-14; 1 Chr 10:8-10). The city later became a part of David’s kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Identification of Beth-shan with Tell el-Husn is confirmed by two Egyptian texts found there that mention its name. The tell, or mound, is 213 feet (64.9 meters) high and about one-half mile (804.5 meters) in circumference at its base. At the time of Israel’s conquest of Canaan, the area that included Beth-shan was allotted to Issachar’s tribe, but Manasseh’s tribe evidently took it over (Jos 17:11). Under King Solomon it was incorporated into the administrative district of Baanah (1 Kgs 4:12). The city is thought to have been destroyed by Shishak (Sheshonk I), pharaoh of Egypt in the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. It was insignificant during the remainder of the OT period; occupation during the Babylonian exile and the postexilic Persian period seems to have been sporadic.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hellenistic period Beth-shan received the name Scythopolis, presumably because it was settled by a colony of Scythian mercenaries serving the Egyptian king Ptolemy II. Temples to the Greek deities Dionysus and Zeus were built. Under the Hasmonean dynasty, Beth-shan became an important administrative center. It prospered as a member of the league of Greco-Roman commercial cities called Decapolis (Mt 4:25; Mk 7:31) and was the only league member west of the Jordan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BETH-SHAN, BETH-SHEAN*<\/h3>\n<p>Strategic Palestinian town located in the subtropical Jordan Valley 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) south of the Sea of Galilee and 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) west of the Jordan River. Beth-shan (alternately Beth-shean) stood at the eastern end of the valley of Jezreel, guarding an important Jordan River crossing. It lay at the junction of two trade routes, one leading north toward Galilee and Damascus, the other leading from the mountains of Gilead west through the Jezreel Valley and the hills of Samaria.<\/p>\n<p>When the Philistines defeated Israel under King Saul at the battle on Mt Gilboa, Beth-shan was a Philistine city. The slain bodies of Saul and his sons were hung in disgrace on the city wall, and Saul’s head was displayed in the temple of Dagon, a Philistine deity (1 Sm 31:10-13; 2 Sm 21:12-14; 1 Chr 10:8-10). The city later became a part of David’s kingdom.<\/p>\n<p>Identification of Beth-shan with Tell el-Husn is confirmed by two Egyptian texts found there that mention its name. The tell, or mound, is 213 feet (64.9 meters) high and about one-half mile (804.5 meters) in circumference at its base. At the time of Israel’s conquest of Canaan, the area that included Beth-shan was allotted to Issachar’s tribe, but Manasseh’s tribe evidently took it over (Jos 17:11). Under King Solomon it was incorporated into the administrative district of Baanah (1 Kgs 4:12). The city is thought to have been destroyed by Shishak (Sheshonk I), pharaoh of Egypt in the 10th century <span>BC<\/span>. It was insignificant during the remainder of the OT period; occupation during the Babylonian exile and the postexilic Persian period seems to have been sporadic.<\/p>\n<p>In the Hellenistic period Beth-shan received the name Scythopolis, presumably because it was settled by a colony of Scythian mercenaries serving the Egyptian king Ptolemy II. Temples to the Greek deities Dionysus and Zeus were built. Under the Hasmonean dynasty, Beth-shan became an important administrative center. It prospered as a member of the league of Greco-Roman commercial cities called Decapolis (Mt 4:25; Mk 7:31) and was the only league member west of the Jordan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BETH-SHAN, BETH-SHEAN* Strategic Palestinian town located in the subtropical Jordan Valley 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) south of the Sea of Galilee and 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) west of the Jordan River. Beth-shan (alternately Beth-shean) stood at the eastern end of the valley of Jezreel, guarding an important Jordan River crossing. It lay at the junction of two trade routes, one leading north toward Galilee and Damascus, the other leading from the mountains of Gilead west through the Jezreel Va...","summary_en":"BETH-SHAN, BETH-SHEAN* Strategic Palestinian town located in the subtropical Jordan Valley 15 miles (24.1 kilometers) south of the Sea of Galilee and 4 miles (6.4 kilometers) west of the Jordan River. Beth-shan (alternately Beth-shean) stood at the eastern end of the valley of Jezreel, guarding an important Jordan River crossing. It lay at the junction of two trade routes, one leading north toward Galilee and Damascus, the other leading from the mountains of Gilead west through the Jezreel Va...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9193,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Decapolis*","title_en":"Decapolis*","content_ro":"<h3>DECAPOLIS*<\/h3>\n<p>Group of city-states where Greeks settled following Alexander the Great’s conquest of the area in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. They were located to the southeast of the Sea of Galilee, with the exception of Scythopolis, which was west of the Jordan River. About <span>AD<\/span> 77 Pliny gave what is the earliest known list of the cities: Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Raphana, and Scythopolis.<\/p>\n<p>With the rise of Jewish nationalism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Jewish king Alexander Janneus seized control of a few of these cities; they remained in the hands of Israel until they were recaptured by the Roman general Pompey in 63 <span>BC<\/span>. During the lifetime of Jesus, the cities of the Decapolis, which had become moderately prosperous trade centers, were consolidated into a Roman alliance against a possible Jewish uprising.<\/p>\n<p>The Decapolis is mentioned three times in the NT. The first is in Matthew 4:25, where great crowds (mostly Greeks and Canaanites) followed Jesus during his early ministry. As we see in Mark 5:20 the demoniac who was healed by Jesus went and proclaimed Jesus throughout the Decapolis region. Finally, Mark 7:31 says Jesus passed through the Decapolis region on his way from Tyre and Sidon to the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DECAPOLIS*<\/h3>\n<p>Group of city-states where Greeks settled following Alexander the Great’s conquest of the area in the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. They were located to the southeast of the Sea of Galilee, with the exception of Scythopolis, which was west of the Jordan River. About <span>AD<\/span> 77 Pliny gave what is the earliest known list of the cities: Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Raphana, and Scythopolis.<\/p>\n<p>With the rise of Jewish nationalism in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the Jewish king Alexander Janneus seized control of a few of these cities; they remained in the hands of Israel until they were recaptured by the Roman general Pompey in 63 <span>BC<\/span>. During the lifetime of Jesus, the cities of the Decapolis, which had become moderately prosperous trade centers, were consolidated into a Roman alliance against a possible Jewish uprising.<\/p>\n<p>The Decapolis is mentioned three times in the NT. The first is in Matthew 4:25, where great crowds (mostly Greeks and Canaanites) followed Jesus during his early ministry. As we see in Mark 5:20 the demoniac who was healed by Jesus went and proclaimed Jesus throughout the Decapolis region. Finally, Mark 7:31 says Jesus passed through the Decapolis region on his way from Tyre and Sidon to the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DECAPOLIS* Group of city-states where Greeks settled following Alexander the Great’s conquest of the area in the fourth century BC. They were located to the southeast of the Sea of Galilee, with the exception of Scythopolis, which was west of the Jordan River. About AD 77 Pliny gave what is the earliest known list of the cities: Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Raphana, and Scythopolis. With the rise of Jewish nationalism in the second century BC, the Jewi...","summary_en":"DECAPOLIS* Group of city-states where Greeks settled following Alexander the Great’s conquest of the area in the fourth century BC. They were located to the southeast of the Sea of Galilee, with the exception of Scythopolis, which was west of the Jordan River. About AD 77 Pliny gave what is the earliest known list of the cities: Canatha, Damascus, Dion, Gadara, Gerasa, Hippos, Pella, Philadelphia, Raphana, and Scythopolis. With the rise of Jewish nationalism in the second century BC, the Jewi...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15620,"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":24380,"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":27061,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Nations","title_en":"Nations","content_ro":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origins\">Origins<\/p>\n<p>The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and language (vv 5, 20, 31). The story of the tower (ziggurat) of Babel, whose peak was to reach to heaven (ch 11), explains that ethnic groups were separated by language barriers and scattered geographically so that they might not collaborate on presumptuous ventures.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, in his sermon in Athens, assumes that the various nations had a common origin, just as the writer of Genesis did, and accepts as part of the design of God the fact that nations should be separated by geographical boundaries (Acts 17:26). The prophet Zephaniah looked forward to the day when God would reverse this state of affairs and cause all the nations to speak one language (Zep 3:9). The writer of Revelation, in his vision of the new heaven and the new earth, saw these natural boundaries abolished. The nations freely intermingle in the new Jerusalem (Rv 21:22-26).<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between “Israel” and “the nations” is not clear-cut. “Israel” evolved from various ethnic groups, and several of “the nations” traced their origins to prominent figures in the Israelite community. Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, lived in Ur of the Chaldees in the delta region of the Tigris-Euphrates valley. With his father he migrated north to Haran, and finally southwest to the land of Canaan (Gn 11:31–12:9). Deuteronomy 26:5 (“a wandering Aramean was my father”) suggests Abraham’s residence was in the district of Mesopotamia known as Aram-naharaim. When Abraham entered into covenant with God, God gave him the token of the covenant relationship: circumcision. Foreigners purchased as slaves were circumcised, thus including them in the covenant community. When Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt into the wilderness, a mixed multitude also went up with them (Ex 12:38), which suggests again that people not biologically related nevertheless identified themselves with the people of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The nation of Israel did not include all of those physically descended from Abraham. The first son of Abraham, Ishmael, had an Egyptian mother and is the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, bedouins who roamed the southern wilderness region (Gn 16). Of the twin sons born to Isaac and Rebekah, Esau, the firstborn, is the father of the Edomites living in the southeast, traditional enemies of Israel (Gn 25:23; Nm 20:21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodandtheNations\">God and the Nations<\/p>\n<p>Scripture presents negative and positive attitudes toward the nations. The nations inhabiting the territory between the Tigris-Euphrates valley and the Nile River were wicked nations. Therefore, God took away their land and gave it to the descendants of Abraham (Gn 15:16-20). Incestuous relationships, adultery, homosexuality, and sexual relationships between men and animals characterized the nations and incurred God’s displeasure (Lv 18). The nations indulged in the practice of spiritism, augury, witchcraft, and necromancy, so the Hebrews were instructed to avoid such activities (19:26; 20:6). The nations worshiped many gods and included in their worship the practice of human sacrifice, often the sacrifice of children—a ritual that God abhors (Lv 20:1-5; 2 Kgs 17:29-34). The prophet Isaiah spoke scathingly of the craftsman who, taking a branch of a tree, used part of it to kindle a fire and fashioned from the remainder a graven image that he then worshiped (Is 44:12-20). The Baalim and Ashteroth, fertility gods of the Canaanites, were a constant source of temptation to the people of Israel. The message repeated throughout Scripture is that for these reasons God would drive out the nations and give their territory to Israel (Ex 34:24; Dt 12:29-31). The prophetic oracles against the nations reinforced this negative attitude (Jer 46–51; Am 1:3–2:3).<\/p>\n<p>However, the Scripture also reflects a more positive attitude toward the nations. As revealed in the book of Psalms, God is not only concerned about Israel; his eyes keep watch over the nations, and all the earth praises and worships him (Ps 66:1-8). The psalmist prays that God’s saving power may be known among all the nations. He affirms that God righteously judges the peoples and guides the nations. All the ends of the earth should fear him (67:7). The prophet Isaiah declares that the Jerusalem temple is to be a house of prayer for all peoples and that God welcomes the foreigner who comes with sacrifices and offering worship (Is 56:6-8). Isaiah’s vision of hope for the latter days pictures people of all nations pouring into Jerusalem to worship the Lord and learn his ways. Instead of nation warring against nation, all will live in peace, ruled by God (2:2-4).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheNationsintheNewTestament\">The Nations in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>According to the Gospels, Jesus ministered not only to the Jews but also to the Gentile nations in accordance with ancient prophecy (Mt 4:15-16). Jesus taught in Galilee, a predominantly non-Jewish area, traveled to Tyre and Sidon (Mk 7:24) and through the Decapolis (v 31). He ministered to a Roman centurion (Lk 7:1-10), the widow of Nain (vv 11-17), and a Syrophoenician woman (Mk 7:26). People from Idumea came to observe his miracles (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The teaching of Jesus was also wide in scope. The narrative of the great judgment (Mt 25:31-46) depicts all nations gathered before the Son of Man, and Jesus commissions the apostles to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19).<\/p>\n<p>Although the book of Acts does not overlook the nations’ role in the death of Jesus (Acts 4:27) and their role in opposing the ministry of Paul (26:17), it nevertheless clearly indicates that the church fulfilled its commission to present the gospel to non-Jewish peoples. Peter proclaims the message about Jesus to the household of Cornelius, a Roman soldier of the Italian Cohort (ch 10). Although the early church resisted the fact that non-Jewish peoples might freely receive the gift of the Spirit, they eventually welcomed this conclusion (11:1-8; 15:1-29). Paul traveled through Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, and Italy, founding or visiting churches that were predominantly Gentile. The book of Acts ends dramatically with Paul preaching the gospel in the city of Rome, the heart of the Roman Empire.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","summary_en":"NATIONS Groups formed on the basis of political or social interests or on kinship. Generally, the word “nations” implies peoples of the world other than the Hebrews, although it can also include the Jews. Origins The book of Genesis attributes to the three sons of Noah the origin of the various “families” or ethnic groups (about 70 in all) who inhabited the eastern Mediterranean regions (Gn 10). The narrative presupposes that each group has its own individual geographical location and languag...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55306,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","summary_en":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82932,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","summary_en":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110558,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","summary_en":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138184,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:31-37<\/strong> This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident takes place there (8:10) without a change of scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","summary_en":"7:31-37 This miracle is very similar in order and vocabulary to the healing of the blind man in 8:22-26. Healing miracles in the Gospels follow a similar pattern—the constant telling and retelling of similar stories probably standardized their form and wording. • This healing miracle includes a change of scene. Although some interpret the next miracle as occurring in the Gentile world (Sidon or Decapolis), it probably took place after Jesus returned to the Sea of Galilee. The next incident ta...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":9032,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Deafness Deaf","title_en":"Deafness Deaf","content_ro":"<h3>DEAF, DEAFNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s judgment (Ex 4:11; Mi 7:16), it was wrong to curse a deaf person (Lv 19:14). In the NT the deaf were among those Jesus healed (Mt 11:5; Mk 7:32-37; Lk 7:22). An epileptic boy whom Jesus healed was afflicted with a “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Such healings authenticated Jesus’ role as Messiah.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEAF, DEAFNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s judgment (Ex 4:11; Mi 7:16), it was wrong to curse a deaf person (Lv 19:14). In the NT the deaf were among those Jesus healed (Mt 11:5; Mk 7:32-37; Lk 7:22). An epileptic boy whom Jesus healed was afflicted with a “dumb and deaf spirit” (Mk 9:25, <span>rsv<\/span>). Such healings authenticated Jesus’ role as Messiah.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEAF, DEAFNESS Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s...","summary_en":"DEAF, DEAFNESS Inability to hear; term used in Scripture to describe both a literal, physical inability and a figurative, spiritual defect. The spiritually deaf were those who either refused to hear the divine message or were rendered incapable because of their lack of spirituality (Ps 38:13). The prophet Isaiah forcefully addressed both types of deaf persons (the figurative in Is 42:18; 43:8; the literal in Is 29:18; 35:5). In the OT, although the condition was considered the result of God’s...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":26709,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Muteness","title_en":"Muteness","content_ro":"<h3>MUTENESS<\/h3>\n<p>The inability to speak. Muteness, or aphasia, can be a momentary phenomenon or a permanent handicap. It may result from mental retardation, brain lesion, or deafness.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible records several examples of muteness. Zechariah was made mute by the angel Gabriel for not believing he would become the father of John the Baptist (Lk 1:18-22). That condition persisted at least nine months, until the baby was born and named (vv 62-64).<\/p>\n<p>Inability to speak is usually associated with neurological diseases or severe structural deformities. When Jesus healed people who were thus afflicted, or hearing-impaired (Mt 9:32-33; 12:22-23; 15:30-31; Mk 7:32-37; 9:17-27; Lk 11:14), observers were understandably astonished.<\/p>\n<p>Other scattered biblical passages refer to muteness in people (Prv 31:8; Is 35:6) and in animals (Is 56:10; 2 Pt 2:16). The fact that false gods and idols cannot speak (Hb 2:18-20; 1 Cor 12:2) was frequently pointed out by the prophets, who contrasted them with the living, speaking God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MUTENESS<\/h3>\n<p>The inability to speak. Muteness, or aphasia, can be a momentary phenomenon or a permanent handicap. It may result from mental retardation, brain lesion, or deafness.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible records several examples of muteness. Zechariah was made mute by the angel Gabriel for not believing he would become the father of John the Baptist (Lk 1:18-22). That condition persisted at least nine months, until the baby was born and named (vv 62-64).<\/p>\n<p>Inability to speak is usually associated with neurological diseases or severe structural deformities. When Jesus healed people who were thus afflicted, or hearing-impaired (Mt 9:32-33; 12:22-23; 15:30-31; Mk 7:32-37; 9:17-27; Lk 11:14), observers were understandably astonished.<\/p>\n<p>Other scattered biblical passages refer to muteness in people (Prv 31:8; Is 35:6) and in animals (Is 56:10; 2 Pt 2:16). The fact that false gods and idols cannot speak (Hb 2:18-20; 1 Cor 12:2) was frequently pointed out by the prophets, who contrasted them with the living, speaking God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MUTENESS The inability to speak. Muteness, or aphasia, can be a momentary phenomenon or a permanent handicap. It may result from mental retardation, brain lesion, or deafness. The Bible records several examples of muteness. Zechariah was made mute by the angel Gabriel for not believing he would become the father of John the Baptist (Lk 1:18-22). That condition persisted at least nine months, until the baby was born and named (vv 62-64). Inability to speak is usually associated with neurologic...","summary_en":"MUTENESS The inability to speak. Muteness, or aphasia, can be a momentary phenomenon or a permanent handicap. It may result from mental retardation, brain lesion, or deafness. The Bible records several examples of muteness. Zechariah was made mute by the angel Gabriel for not believing he would become the father of John the Baptist (Lk 1:18-22). That condition persisted at least nine months, until the baby was born and named (vv 62-64). Inability to speak is usually associated with neurologic...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"33":[{"id":55307,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","summary_en":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82933,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","summary_en":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110559,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","summary_en":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138185,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:33<\/strong> The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","summary_en":"7:33 The healing was performed privately (7:33; see 5:40-43; 8:23) to prevent the spread of messianic fervor (see 3:11-12; cp. John 6:15). • Jesus also used saliva in a healing at Mark 8:23, where he spit on a man’s eyes in curing his blindness. The medicinal use of saliva in ancient times is well documented.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":10956,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ephphatha*","title_en":"Ephphatha*","content_ro":"<h3>EPHPHATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration in the imperative voice of the Aramaic expression “be opened,” used by Jesus in the healing of a deaf mute (Mk 7:34, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). No attempt at establishing a magical word formula was intended; Mark simply preserved Jesus’ actual wording.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EPHPHATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Transliteration in the imperative voice of the Aramaic expression “be opened,” used by Jesus in the healing of a deaf mute (Mk 7:34, <span>nlt<\/span> mg). No attempt at establishing a magical word formula was intended; Mark simply preserved Jesus’ actual wording.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EPHPHATHA* Transliteration in the imperative voice of the Aramaic expression “be opened,” used by Jesus in the healing of a deaf mute (Mk 7:34, nlt mg). No attempt at establishing a magical word formula was intended; Mark simply preserved Jesus’ actual wording.","summary_en":"EPHPHATHA* Transliteration in the imperative voice of the Aramaic expression “be opened,” used by Jesus in the healing of a deaf mute (Mk 7:34, nlt mg). No attempt at establishing a magical word formula was intended; Mark simply preserved Jesus’ actual wording.","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55308,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","summary_en":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82934,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","summary_en":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110560,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","summary_en":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138186,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:34<\/strong> Since Jesus was <em>looking up to heaven<\/em> when <em>he sighed<\/em><em>,<\/em> his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • <em>Ephphatha<\/em> is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","summary_en":"7:34 Since Jesus was looking up to heaven when he sighed, his sigh is probably best understood as a prayerful gesture. • Ephphatha is an Aramaic term that Mark translates for his readers (see also 3:17; 5:41; 14:36; 15:34). These are not magical formulas or incantations; Mark is simply recounting some of the original words Jesus spoke. Matthew and Luke do not seem to have attributed any special significance to the Aramaic words of Jesus, since they did not include them in their Gospels.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":55309,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","summary_en":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82935,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","summary_en":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110561,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","summary_en":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138187,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 7:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 7:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>7:36-37<\/strong> Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.<\/p>","summary_ro":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","summary_en":"7:36-37 Despite his desire to avoid attention, Jesus’ greatness shone too brightly—his person, his teaching, and his ability to heal inspired awe, and he could not be hidden.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65360,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92986,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120612,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148238,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah","title_en":"The Secret of the Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Secret of the Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity to keep his healings and identity secret?<\/p>\n<p>One possibility relates to how the Roman authorities would have responded to an extremely popular preacher who proclaimed the arrival of God’s Kingdom, performed marvelous healings, and openly allowed his followers to call him Israel’s long-awaited Messiah and King. Roman authorities would not tolerate it—they would immediately seek to suppress such a movement. In the Roman Empire, there was no room for another kingdom or for a messianic rescuer from Roman occupation. Thus, though Jesus acknowledged to his disciples that he was the Messiah (Mark 8:27-30), he did not intend to overthrow Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Another possible reason for this secrecy has to do with the prolific misunderstanding of Jesus’ identity that we see throughout the Gospel of Mark, even among his closest followers. Jesus makes clear that his identity as Messiah and Son of God is directly tied to his suffering and death, a reality which did not match up with Jewish expectations regarding the Messiah. Thus, immediately after Peter declares that Jesus is the Messiah, Jesus announces that he would suffer and die (Mark 8:27-31), which generates a response from Peter that demonstrates his lack of understanding (8:32-33). It was not his miracles or his profound teaching that served as the primary attribute of his messiahship, but rather his sacrificial death.<\/p>\n<p>For these reasons, it was expedient for Jesus to teach about God’s Kingdom in parables (see Mark 4:1-34, especially 4:10-12), to minimize the excitement created by his miracles (1:44; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26), to conceal his presence at times from the people (7:24; 9:30-31), to conceal his teaching from outsiders (4:10-12, 33-34; 7:17), and to command those who knew his true identity not to reveal it (1:23-26, 34; 3:11-12; 8:29-30; 9:9). Jesus came “to give his life as a ransom for many” (10:45), not to lead the nation of Israel in rebellion against Rome.<\/p>\n<p>Nonetheless, Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1), could not be hidden. The secret was not and cannot be kept (7:36), for Jesus is too great. Those who experienced and witnessed his healing touch could not help but proclaim what he had done. Jesus’ identity broke through, and it became clear that he is indeed the Messiah, the Son of God, the Lord over nature, disease, and death. And for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, who are made aware of his identity in the very first verse, Jesus was demonstrated to be the Messiah precisely because of—not in spite of—his suffering, death, and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 8:4; 16:20; Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9, 30-31; Luke 9:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","summary_en":"The Secret of the Messiah Throughout the Gospel of Mark, Jesus tells others—those he healed or raised from the dead, the disciples who recognized him as the Christ, and the demons who had a correct understanding of his true identity—not to reveal his identity (e.g., Mark 1:34, 44; 3:11-12; 5:43; 7:36; 8:29-30; 9:9; this theme occurs far less frequently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke—see Matt 8:4; 16:20; Luke 9:21). Why did Jesus command those he healed and those who knew his true identity...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"37":[{"id":65384,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93010,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120636,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148262,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of God","title_en":"The Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of God<\/h3>\n<p>Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the title “Son of God” is applied to the people of Israel (Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6, 18-19; Ps 82:6; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Hos 11:1; Mal 2:10) and to angels (Gen 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). It is also applied in a special way to Israel’s king—the anointed king was seen as God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27). The title also appears in intertestamental Jewish literature (including the Apocrypha and the Dead Sea Scrolls), possibly in reference to the coming Messiah. Jews in the first century would have likely considered the coming Messiah as a “Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as “the Son of God” was affirmed by God at his baptism (Mark 1:11; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22) and by demons he encountered during his ministry (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 1:34; 3:11; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28). Later, the disciples recognized Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20) and Jesus immediately began to teach them of his forthcoming death (Matt 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22). Then, at Jesus’ transfiguration, God affirmed the disciples’ confession (Matt 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:35). As Jesus approached his death, he affirmed his unique identity as God’s Son, both through his teaching (Mark 12:1-12; 13:32) and at his trial (Mark 14:61-62).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the climactic confession of Jesus’ identity as God’s Son took place at the crucifixion, where a Roman centurion became the first human in the narrative to recognize that Jesus is truly the Son of God (Mark 15:39). While Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is demonstrated in his exorcisms and by his Father’s declarations, his sacrificial death and the way he died (Mark 15:33-39) provide the supreme evidence that he is the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 4:22; Deut 32:5-6; 2 Sam 7:14; 1 Chr 22:10; 28:6; Pss 2:7; 89:26-27; Jer 3:19; 31:9, 20; Matt 26:63-68; Mark 1:1, 11, 24; 4:35-41; 8:31; 9:7; 12:1-12; 14:61-62; 15:32-39; Luke 1:32-35; 4:41; John 1:18; 3:16-17, 35-36; 5:19-26; 17:5, 24; 20:31; Acts 13:33; Rom 1:4; 5:10; 8:3, 32; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; 4:4-5; Eph 4:13; 1 Thes 1:10; Heb 1:2-14; 3:6; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:3; 2:22; 3:23; 4:9-10, 14; 5:20; 2 Jn 1:3, 9; Rev 2:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","summary_en":"The Son of God Time and again Jesus’ healings, exorcisms, raising of the dead, and teachings created wonder, awe, amazement, and fear (e.g., Mark 1:22, 27; 4:41; 5:15, 20, 33; 7:37; 9:15; 10:24, 26, 32; 12:17; 15:5). This amazement emphasizes the miraculous nature of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers wanted their readers to ask themselves, “Who is this man? . . . Even the wind and waves obey him!” (Matt 8:27; Mark 4:41; Luke 8:25). Mark gives the answer at the very beginning of his Gospel: ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Marcu 7
— 37 versete
Marcu 7
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse