Marcu 8
1 În zilele acelea, fiindcă se strânsese din nou mult norod, şi n-avea ce mânca, Isus a chemat pe ucenicii Săi, şi le-a zis:
2 ,,Mi-e milă de norodul acesta; căci iată că de trei zile stau lângă Mine, şi n-au ce mânca.
3 Dacă le voi da drumul acasă flămânzi, au să leşine de foame pe drum, fiindcă unii din ei au venit de departe.``
4 Ucenicii I-au răspuns: ,,Cum ar putea cineva să sature cu pâne pe oamenii aceştia, aici într-un loc pustiu?``
5 ,,Câte pâni aveţi?`` i-a întrebat Isus. ,,Şapte``, I-au răspuns ei.
6 Atunci a poruncit norodului să şadă pe pământ; a luat cele şapte pâni; şi, după ce a mulţămit lui Dumnezeu, le-a frânt şi le-a dat ucenicilor Săi ca să le împartă; şi ei le-au împărţit norodului.
7 Mai aveau şi cîţiva peştişori: şi Isus, după ce i-a binecuvântat, a poruncit să-i împartă şi pe aceia.
8 Au mâncat şi s-au săturat; şi au ridicat şapte coşniţe, pline cu rămăşiţele de fărămituri.
9 Erau aproape patru mii de inşi. În urmă Isus le-a dat drumul.
10 Isus a intrat îndată în corabie cu ucenicii Săi, şi a venit în părţile Dalmanutei.
11 Fariseii au venit deodată, şi au început o ceartă de vorbe cu Isus; şi, ca să -L pună la încercare, I-au cerut un semn din cer.
12 Isus a suspinat adânc în duhul Său, şi a zis: ,,Pentru ce cere neamul acesta un semn? Adevărat vă spun că neamului acestuia nu i se va da deloc un semn.``
13 Apoi i-a lăsat, şi a intrat iarăş în corabie, ca să treacă de cealaltă parte.
14 Ucenicii uitaseră să ia pâni; cu ei în corabie n-aveau decât o pâne.
15 Isus le dădea în grijă, şi le zicea: ,,Luaţi seama, să vă păziţi bine de aluatul Fariseilor şi de aluatul lui Irod!``
16 Ucenicii se gândeau şi ziceau între ei: ,,Fiindcă n-avem pâni.``
17 Isus a înţeles lucrul acesta, şi le-a zis: ,,Pentruce vă gândiţi că n-aveţi pâni? Tot nu pricepeţi şi tot nu înţelegeţi? Aveţi inima împietrită?
18 Aveţi ochi, şi nu vedeţi? Aveţi urechi, şi nu auziţi? Şi nu vă aduceţi aminte deloc?
19 Când am frânt cele cinci pâni la cei cinci mii de bărbaţi, câte coşuri pline cu fărămituri aţi ridicat?`` ,,Douăsprezece``, I-au răspuns ei.
20 ,,Şi când am frânt cele şapte pâni la cei patru mii de bărbaţi, câte coşniţe pline cu fărămituri aţi ridicat?`` ,,Şapte``, I-au răspuns ei.
21 Şi El le-a zis: ,,Tot nu înţelegeţi?``
22 Au venit la Betsaida; au adus la Isus un orb, şi L-au rugat să Se atingă de el.
23 Isus a luat pe orb de mână, şi l-a scos afară din sat; apoi i-a pus scuipat pe ochi, Şi-a pus mânile peste el, şi l-a întrebat: ,,Vezi ceva?``
24 El s-a uitat, şi a zis: ,,Văd nişte oameni umblând, dar mi se par ca nişte copaci.``
25 Isus i-a pus din nou mânile pe ochi; i-a spus să se uite ţintă; şi când s-a uitat, a fost tămăduit, şi a văzut toate lucrurile desluşit.
26 Atunci Isus l-a trimes acasă, şi i-a zis: ,,Să nu intri în sat, şi nici să nu spui cuiva în sat.``
27 Isus a plecat cu ucenicii Săi în satele Cezareii lui Filip. Pe drum le-a pus următoarea întrebare: ,,Cine zic oamenii că sânt Eu?``
28 Ei I-au răspuns: ,,Ioan Botezătorul; alţii: Ilie; alţii: Unul din prooroci.``
29 ,,Dar voi``, i-a întrebat El, ,,cine ziceţi că sânt Eu?`` ,,Tu eşti Hristosul!`` I-a răspuns Petru.
30 Isus le-a poruncit cu tărie să nu spună nimănui lucrul acesta despre El.
31 Atunci a început să-i înveţe că Fiul omului trebuie să pătimească mult, să fie tăgăduit de bătrâni, de preoţii cei mai de seamă şi de cărturari, să fie omorât, şi după trei zile să învieze.
32 Le spunea lucrurile acestea pe faţă. Petru însă L-a luat de o parte, şi a început să -L mustre.
33 Dar Isus S-a întors şi S-a uitat la ucenicii Săi, a mustrat pe Petru, şi i-a zis: ,,Înapoia Mea, Satano! Fiindcă tu nu te gândeşti la lucrurile lui Dumnezeu, ci la lucrurile oamenilor.``
34 Apoi a chemat la El norodul împreună cu ucenicii Săi, şi le-a zis: ,,Dacă voieşte cineva să vină după Mine, să se lepede de sine însuş, să-şi ia crucea, şi să Mă urmeze.
35 Căci oricine va vrea să-şi scape viaţa, o va pierde; dar oricine îşi va pierde viaţa din pricina Mea şi din pricina Evangheliei, o va mântui.
36 Şi ce foloseşte unui om să cîştige toată lumea, dacă îşi pierde sufletul?
37 Sau ce va da un om în schimb pentru sufletul său?
38 Pentrucă de oricine se va ruşina de Mine şi de cuvintele Mele, în acest neam preacurvar şi păcătos, Se va ruşina şi Fiul omului, când va veni în slava Tatălui Său împreună cu sfinţii îngeri.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":24340,"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":55310,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","summary_en":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55311,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","summary_en":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82936,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","summary_en":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82937,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","summary_en":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110562,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","summary_en":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110563,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","summary_en":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138188,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-10<\/strong> The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","summary_en":"8:1-10 The stories about feeding the 4,000 and the 5,000 are similar. All four Gospels report the earlier feeding of the 5,000 (6:35-44; Matt 14:13-21; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:1-15), but only Mark and Matthew (Matt 15:32-39) also record the feeding of the 4,000 as a separate miracle (Mark 8:19-21; Matt 16:9-10). The details of the events are different.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138189,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:1","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:1-3<\/strong> The last reference to a <em>large crowd<\/em> was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","summary_en":"8:1-3 The last reference to a large crowd was at the feeding of the 5,000 (6:34). Jesus showed compassion in 6:34 because the people “were like sheep without a shepherd.” These stories reflect Jesus’ concern for the total person—this time especially for the people’s hunger. They were in the wilderness (8:4) and had no food (8:1). They had been with Jesus for three days and had nothing to eat (8:2), and they had come a long way and needed to eat before returning home (8:3).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":16585,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Homes and Dwellings","title_en":"Homes and Dwellings","content_ro":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HOMES AND DWELLINGS<\/h3>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Middle Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Late Bronze Age Houses<\/p>\n<p>• Israelite Houses of the Iron Age<\/p>\n<p>• Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiddleBronzeAgeHouses\">Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard.<\/p>\n<p>The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on one side, generally on the west of the courtyard, to avoid having the prevailing westerly winds blow smoke into the room. Silos for storing grain were normally in the room rather than in the courtyard. Good examples of such one-roomed houses were found at Tell Nagila, northwest of Beersheba, dating to about 1700 <span>BC<\/span>. Three such houses had a room 10 by 7 feet (3 by 2.1 meters) and a courtyard 10 by 16 feet (3 by 4.9 meters). Partitions sometimes divided the room. The walls were made of rough stone and mud bricks covered by mud plaster and were hardly thick enough to carry a second story. Houses were set close together to take advantage of a common back wall with entrances to the court on roughly parallel streets. Each house contained a stone and clay bench along the walls.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes several rooms were built off one side of the courtyard. The grandest of these yet found comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1600 <span>BC<\/span>, probably the house of a local governor or patrician. There were no less than six rooms on the western side of the courtyard, which was some 35 by 19 feet (10.7 by 5.8 meters) in size. The roofed living space, including both the ground and second floors, was about 1,500 square feet (139 square meters); a second floor is assumed from the thickness of the walls all around. The ground floor may have been multifunctional with two stable rooms and two storage areas. Other less imposing variants of the courtyard house with rooms on one side only come from this same tell in Stratum E (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The second type of house in the middle Bronze Age had a roofed hall with rooms on one or two sides. A good example of such a house with rooms on one side comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, dating from about 1800 <span>BC<\/span>. The large, roofed, rectangular hall contained three large, flat stones set along the long axis to serve as foundations for the wooden roof supports. Rafters of wood and a roof of reeds covered with mud were found in the debris. Each of the three rooms on the west was entered from the hall. The stone foundations and mud brick walls were substantial enough to support a second story that could be reached by an exterior wooden staircase or ladder. The floor of earth, ashes, and straw was carefully smoothed over.<\/p>\n<p>A third type of house consisted of an open courtyard with rooms on two adjacent sides of the court. A good example comes from Tell Beit Mirsim, built on the ruins of the house with the roofed hall. The roofed hall became the court. A house at Tell Taanach from the middle Bronze IIB period (c. 1700 <span>BC<\/span>) was of very strong construction with walls over three feet (.9 meter) thick laid in mortar. The courtyard contained a cistern, and an oven was found in a room on the east side of the house. The ground floors were plastered and covered 2,300 square feet (214 square meters). An interior staircase led to a second story.<\/p>\n<p>In some houses, rooms were placed at opposite sides of the courtyard. Good examples come from Beth Shemesh (Tell er-Rumeilah) and Megiddo. At Beth Shemesh the city wall formed the south wall of the house, and rooms lay east and west of the courtyard. Entrance was from the street into one of the rooms. The other rooms were entered by crossing the courtyard. The outer walls were over three feet (91.4 centimeters) thick and interior walls a foot and a half (45.7 centimeters) thick. Mud and lime plaster coated the walls.<\/p>\n<p>At Megiddo houses were built against the north city wall. In level XII (c. 1750–1700 <span>BC<\/span>) three well-preserved houses of this kind have been found. The houses were separated by walls at right angles to the city wall. Entrance to each house was through one door on the street, through a room, and into a courtyard paved with small stones and pebbles. The courtyards housed the ovens, and one house had a cistern.<\/p>\n<p>A fourth type of middle Bronze Age house had rooms on three sides of the courtyard. These rooms varied greatly in size and use. A good example dating to about 1600 <span>BC<\/span> comes from Megiddo, level IX. The house was 42 by 39 feet (12.8 by 11.9 meters) in size and contained nine rooms of varying sizes. The courtyard was plastered with lime and had a large oven in the center. A second oven was found in an eastern room. Each room had a door to the courtyard. This house, like others of the middle Bronze Age, had burials under the floors (cf. 1 Sm 25:1; 1 Kgs 2:34 for biblical references in the Iron Age).<\/p>\n<p>The wide variety of Palestinian houses during the middle Bronze Age points to a level of prosperity much higher than that of the early Bronze Age. Both houses and tombs yielded quantities of graceful and well-made household utensils.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LateBronzeAgeHouses\">Late Bronze Age Houses (c. 1550–1200 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Information is limited for this period, due partly to the accidents of excavation and partly to the severe destruction of many sites at the close of the age from the hands of Israelites, Sea Peoples, Egyptians, and others.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IsraeliteHousesoftheIronAge\">Israelite Houses of the Iron Age (c. 1200–600 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>Many examples of domestic buildings come from this period. The Israelite structures were at first rather crude, but the quality improved. Thus at Tell Qasil in the 12th century there were poor homes with a courtyard and single room on one side. At contemporary Beth-shemesh one larger house had a foundation of large uncut stones, a courtyard some 34 by 20 feet (10.4 by 6.1 meters), and three rooms on one side 11 by 10½ feet (3.4 by 3.2 meters). There was rough stone paving in the court and in two of the rooms. At Hazor a house was discovered that had a courtyard and rooms on one side dating to about 900 <span>BC<\/span>. Half of the courtyard was covered, the roof being supported on stone pillars. These stone pillars are very characteristic of the Iron Age houses in Palestine and have been found in sites all over the country.<\/p>\n<p>The most common type of house in the days of the kings of Judah and Israel was one in which rooms were built on three sides of a courtyard. This type of house has sometimes been called the “four-room house.” A long room was built across the short axis of the courtyard, and two other rooms, one on each side of the court, were constructed on the long axis. The courtyard was divided into three by two rows of pillars that extended down the long axis of the court. These pillars supported the roof and gave support for walls, either half height or full height. Entrance to the house was from the street into the courtyard, where ovens and silos were normally placed, although this varied. Such a framework could be expanded by adding a row of rooms outside the existing rooms on the long axis of the court. There were many ways to divide long rooms into smaller ones. In some cases where the walls were strong enough, a second story was added. An excellent example of a four-room house that was later enlarged was found at Shechem and dated to the period around 748–724 <span>BC<\/span>. The courtyard contained a storage bin, a large open hearth, a quern (hand mill), stone grinders, and the bases of pottery jars resting in stone pedestals. In the rooms that had been added there was a device for catching water from the roof and delivering it to an underground water system. A large silo in one room was connected to a kitchen.<\/p>\n<p>There is evidence that larger Iron Age houses served as industrial or commercial buildings. Certain houses at Tell Beit Mirsim contained dye vats and loom weights. In other places the large number of querns suggests a wheat-grinding industry. There is evidence also of wine vats, or potters’ equipment, and of shops. Some houses had rooms set apart for religious purposes and contained incense stands, figurines, small altars, and the like.<\/p>\n<p>The excavations of Kathleen Kenyon at Jerusalem brought to light houses from the last days of Judah. They were rather small and irregularly planned but of the same general design as those in the hill country sites of Judah—a courtyard divided by a row of stone pillars that supported the roof.<\/p>\n<p>The contrast between big houses and small houses in some towns probably indicates the social inequality referred to in the prophets. In the 10th and 9th centuries <span>BC<\/span> there was a fairly uniform picture of many small houses and a few large ones. By the 8th century <span>BC<\/span>, at a town like Tirzah, there were three or four large houses and a great many flimsy structures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HousesinNewTestamentTimes\">Houses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>There are references in the NT to houses, roofs, doors, foundations, an upper room, and lamps. One of Jesus’ parables refers to good and bad foundations (Mt 7:25). In one incident friends took a paralyzed man up to the roof, which they took apart to lower him into the room where Jesus was (Mk 2:4). Jesus referred to proclamations made from the housetops (Mt 10:27; Lk 12:3), and Peter went up on the roof to pray (Acts 10:9). Houses were swept to find lost objects (Lk 15:8) and illuminated by lamps (Mt 5:15). There are several references to houses of specific individuals (Mk 8:3; Lk 10:5; 16:4; 19:9; Jn 11:20; Acts 4:34; 9:11; 10:32). Some houses had upper rooms on the roof reached by an outside staircase. The Passover meal was prepared in such a large upstairs room (Mk 14:12-15). The disciples lodged in a similar room after the death and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 1:13). In such houses there were sometimes servants (10:7), and some had a guest room (Mk 14:14). We conclude from the NT data that there was a variety in the size and elegance of the houses of Jesus’ day. A typical street in Judea or Galilee would have houses ranging from the small house (25 to 30 square feet or 2.3 to 2.8 square meters) to the mansion of the upper classes, which could be two or more stories high embellished by rows of pillars and architectural adornment.<\/p>\n<p>For the precise character of these houses, we have to turn to archaeological and literary evidence. The writings of the rabbis and Josephus fill in many details. Excavation in sites of the early Roman (Herodian) period (37 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 70) have provided more tangible evidence. A rich source of information is the excavation in the old Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. One large house of some 209 square yards in size had a central courtyard where three cooking ovens and a water cistern were found. Large niches set in some of the walls contained broken pottery and must have been cupboards. Traces of mosaic floors and plastered walls give an idea of the beauty of this house. There were several rooms off the courtyard, perhaps as many as ten. The remains of other fine houses of the late second temple period have been found further west, notably in the area of the Armenian cemetery on Mt Zion, in which beautiful frescoes were preserved exhibiting a unique representation of birds. Other houses have yielded mosaic pavements with purely geometric patterns, thus adhering to the injunction against depicting animal forms.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Architecture.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","summary_en":"HOMES AND DWELLINGS Preview • Middle Bronze Age Houses • Late Bronze Age Houses • Israelite Houses of the Iron Age • Houses in New Testament Times Middle Bronze Age Houses (c. 1800–1500 BC) Israel’s early ancestors lived mostly in tents or temporary dwellings, but the Canaanites of the middle Bronze Age (into whose land the Israelites came) lived in substantial houses of several rooms built around a courtyard. The simplest form of this new type of house had a courtyard with a single room on o...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":55312,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","summary_en":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82938,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","summary_en":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110564,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","summary_en":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138190,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:4","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:4","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:4<\/strong> The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna <em>in the wilderness<\/em> for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could not do by themselves, the mighty Son of God would do through them.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","summary_en":"8:4 The disciples’ frustration at the situation reveals their dullness. They knew how God provided manna in the wilderness for his people in Moses’ time (Exod 16). They were now in the presence of one far greater than Moses (see Mark 9:5-7) and had recently seen him feed a greater number of people in a similar situation (6:30-44). However, they still did not understand (cp. 6:52). Even so, Jesus worked through them to bring physical and spiritual food to the hungry (8:6-8). What they could no...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":55313,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","summary_en":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82939,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","summary_en":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110565,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","summary_en":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138191,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:5","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:5<\/strong> <em>Seven loaves:<\/em> Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","summary_en":"8:5 Seven loaves: Numerous attempts have been made to allegorize the numbers in the two feeding miracles, but the lack of consensus among these interpretations, and the reference to “a few fish” in the present story, suggest that the numbers are not symbolic. None of the Gospel writers associate any clear significance with these numbers, and this should warn us against doing so. As with the feeding of the 5,000, the purpose of the numbers is to magnify the greatness of the miracle and of Jesus.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":23493,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"the Lord’s Supper","title_en":"the Lord’s Supper","content_ro":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LORD’S SUPPER, The<\/h3>\n<p>The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on what he had “received from the Lord” concerning the institution of this supper “on the night when he was betrayed.” Like Luke, Paul gives the Lord’s command to his disciples: “Do this in remembrance of me” (1 Cor 11:24-25). According to Acts 2, the early Christians from the beginning of the life of the church met regularly for “the breaking of bread.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>• The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>• Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheAccountsoftheInstitution\">The Accounts of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the Lord’s Supper is recorded in Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22-26; and Luke 22:14-20. John’s Gospel (ch 13) tells of the Last Supper Jesus shared with his disciples, of his washing the disciples’ feet and the teaching associated with that, but does not mention his institution of Communion. Many see the Lord’s Supper reflected in the teaching of John 6, following the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 and Jesus’ speaking of himself as “the bread of life,” but this is open to question. First Corinthians 11:23-26 gives Paul’s version of the institution, which he speaks of as “receiving” and “delivering” to the Corinthian Christians.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke 22:17-18 Jesus is said to have passed the cup to the disciples with the words “Take this, and divide it among yourselves” before taking the bread and giving it to them. In most early manuscripts there is then a second cup after the giving of the bread. This difference of Luke from the other Gospels and from Paul has been variously explained, but whether there are two cups of wine at the supper or a different order in the giving of the bread and the wine, it makes no essential difference to the fact and the meaning of the institution.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTimeoftheInstitution\">The Time of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>All of the narratives—the three Gospels and 1 Corinthians—speak of the Last Supper when the Eucharist was instituted as taking place a few hours before Jesus’ arrest. All four Gospels tell, in this context, of Jesus’ words to his disciples, about Judas’s betrayal, and about Jesus telling Peter that he would deny his Master. Matthew (Mt 26:17-20), Mark (Mk 14:12-17), and Luke (Lk 22:7-14) all say clearly that this Last Supper was prepared by the disciples and kept by Jesus with them as a Passover meal. John speaks of it as happening “before the feast of the Passover” and then says that at the time of the trial of Jesus before Pilate the Jewish leaders “did not enter the praetorium, so that they might not be defiled, but might eat the passover” (Jn 13:1; 18:28, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Various explanations of this difference between John and the other Gospels have been suggested, such as that different groups of the Jews kept the Passover at different times, that the meal in the upper room was not strictly a Passover but a fellowship meal at the Passover season, or that Jesus deliberately chose for his own special reasons to celebrate the Passover before the normal time. Luke 22:15 gives his words, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer” (<span>rsv<\/span>). However the differences between the Gospels may be explained, and whenever the gathering around the table took place, it is clear that the Last Supper had the significance of a Passover meal.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, there is an inevitable similarity between the celebration of the Passover as a feast of the old covenant and the Lord’s Supper as a feast of the new. The former looks back with thankful remembrance to the people’s redemption and liberation from Egypt by the act of God, associated with the sacrifice of the Passover lamb. The latter looks back with thankful remembrance to redemption by the act of God through the sacrifice of Christ. The apostle Paul links the two: “Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (1 Cor 5:7, <span>niv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WordsandActionsoftheInstitution\">Words and Actions of the Institution<\/p>\n<p>The association of the Last Supper with the Passover points to the importance of the OT background for our understanding of the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. This OT background is equally important in understanding the words and actions of Jesus in the upper room.<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my body.”<\/h5>\n<p>The actions of Jesus in taking the bread are described similarly in Matthew (Mt 26:26), Mark (Mk 14:22), Luke (Lk 22:19), and 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 11:23-24). Jesus took the bread, gave thanks to God (“blessing” has the same meaning in the biblical context), and broke it. It is noteworthy that the same three actions are described in the records of the feeding of the 5,000 and of the 4,000 (Mk 6:41; 8:6). What he said, according to all four accounts of the Last Supper, was “This is my body.” Christians in Catholic, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions have differed in their understanding of the precise meaning of those words. What is clear is that in the taking of the bread there is the realization of Jesus’ giving himself, his body to be broken on the cross, his life offered that we, in and through him, might have life. First Corinthians 11:24 gives the words as “This is my body which is for you,” and some early manuscripts have “broken for you.”<\/p>\n<h5>“Do this in remembrance of me.”<\/h5>\n<p>This specific instruction is found only in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24. Some have argued that the absence of the words in the other Gospel records indicates that it was not the explicit intention of the Lord that what he did at the Last Supper was to be repeated as a Christian sacrament. Yet all the Gospels were written when the breaking of bread had been a regular practice in the life of the church for years. Matthew and Mark, therefore, may have thought it unnecessary to express Jesus’ intention with those words. They were taken for granted.<\/p>\n<p>It must also be said that these words have been interpreted differently in various Christian traditions. Many Protestant Christians have understood them to mean that in the Holy Communion we are to recall with great thankfulness that Christ loved us and gave himself to die for us. In the Roman Catholic Church the word “remembrance” has been understood as a memorial before God, a representing of the sacrifice of Christ before the Father. “This do” has been interpreted as meaning “offer this,” and even in the second century Christian writers spoke of the Eucharist as a “sacrifice.” Protestant Christians generally have felt the danger of this way of speaking; it can detract from, or even deny, the biblical understanding of the sacrifice of Christ having been offered once and for all, sufficiently atoning for the sins of the world (cf. Heb 7:27; 9:12). It must be said, however, that many Roman Catholic statements today stress the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross; and many Protestant scholars, while not wishing to introduce a sacrificial understanding of the Lord’s Supper, stress that “remembrance” is more than simply calling to mind a past action. In biblical thinking “remembrance” often involves a realization and appropriation in the present of what has been done or what has proved true in the past (see Pss 98:3; 106:45; 112:6; Eccl 12:1; Is 57:11).<\/p>\n<h5>“This is my blood of the [new] covenant.”<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus took the cup of wine, gave thanks, and handed it to his disciples for them all to drink. In essence the four accounts of the institution agree. Matthew (Mt 26:28) and Mark (Mk 14:24) give the words of Jesus as “This is my blood of the [new] covenant.” Luke 22:20 has “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood,” and 1 Corinthians 11:25 is similar to this. This refers back to the ritual of making a covenant with the offering of sacrifice, as the covenant between God and Israel after the exodus (Ex 24:1-8). Implied also is that the prophetic hope of the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) was fulfilled in Jesus, as Hebrews 8–9 describes.<\/p>\n<h5>“Poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/h5>\n<p>The meaning of the death of Jesus as a sacrifice is linked with the understanding of the Passover and of the covenant. It is also linked with what Isaiah 53 says of the suffering Servant making himself “an offering for sin” (Is 53:10). Luke 22:37 includes among the words of Jesus in the upper room the statement, “This scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was reckoned with transgressors.’ ” That verse, Isaiah 53:12, also says, “he poured out his soul to death” and “he bore the sin of many.” Mark 14:24 appears to allude to these Scriptures when Jesus speaks of his blood “poured out for many,” and Matthew 26:28 adds “for the forgiveness of sins.”<\/p>\n<h5>Expectation for the Future<\/h5>\n<p>All four accounts of the Last Supper associate, though in different ways, an expectation for the future with the institution of the Eucharist. In Mark 14:25 it comes in the words of Jesus, “Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (<span>rsv<\/span>). In Matthew 26:29 that future drinking of the fruit of the vine is said to be “with you in my Father’s kingdom.” In Luke 22:18 there are similar words, and two verses earlier the statement about fulfilling the Passover “in the kingdom of God.” All of these can be understood as the ultimate realization of another hope that both OT and later Jewish apocalyptic writings set forward: the messianic banquet, the feast on the mountain of the Lord of which Isaiah 25:6 speaks. In 1 Corinthians 11:26 that future hope is quite explicitly that of Christ’s second coming; for, says the apostle, “As often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePracticeoftheEarlyChurch\">The Practice of the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>In Acts 2:42, after the record of what happened at Pentecost, it says “they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers” (<span>rsv<\/span>). Further, “day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts” (Acts 2:46, <span>rsv<\/span>). Two questions are raised about these words and the practice that lay behind them. Do they simply mean that the Christians shared fellowship meals together? Acts 2:46 seems to speak of breaking bread and partaking of food as two separate actions. Moreover, Acts 20:7 in speaking of Christians at Troas “on the first day of the week . . . gathered together to break bread” seems clearly to allude to a Christian service and not just a meal. From 1 Corinthians 10 and perhaps from the reference to “love feasts” in Jude 12, we may reasonably deduce that a meal in Christian fellowship and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper often took place together. A second question is whether the earliest “breaking of bread,” as in the Jerusalem church, may have been a different rite from that with the bread and wine, the former recalling the fellowship of the disciples with the risen Lord, the latter especially recalling his sacrificial death. There is no direct evidence to support such a view. The Lord’s Supper to which the Gospels bear witness involved the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of the blood of Christ “poured out for many.” We may assume, too, that the tradition that the apostle Paul received, followed, and passed on to others went back to his earliest years as a Christian and so involved the breaking of the bread and the sharing of the cup in remembrance of Christ, and thus proclaiming the Lord’s death until his return.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaulsTeaching\">Paul’s Teaching<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s teaching, as in the Gospels, the Lord’s Supper clearly involves the backward look in thankful remembrance for the sacrifice of Christ offered once for all for the sins of the world, the realization of the Lord being with his people in the present, and the look forward in hope. Other aspects of teaching relating to the Eucharist are brought out in 1 Corinthians 10–11. The teaching arises from practical aspects of the situation in the Corinthian church; the need to be aware of the danger of turning back in any way to the worship of idols; and the potential divisions in the Christian fellowship, including that between rich and poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Fellowship with Christ<\/h5>\n<p>To partake of the bread and to drink of the cup is spoken of as having part with Christ, as sharing in sacrificial meals would mean partaking at “the table of demons” (1 Cor 10:21). “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). “Participation” is the translation of the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span><em>,<\/em> so often rendered “fellowship” in NT passages. When the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, there must often have been a recalling not only of the Last Supper on the night before Jesus died, but also of his presence with his disciples on the first Easter and his making himself known to them in the breaking of the bread (Lk 24:30-35). They continued to experience that fellowship with him.<\/p>\n<h5>Feeding on Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Of the two Christian sacraments, baptism has a once-for-all nature, while Holy Communion is repeated. The life of Christ has been offered for sins once for all on the cross, and we find life in turning to him—baptism signifies that. At the same time that life is also offered to us constantly for the nourishing of our spiritual lives day by day—of this regular feeding on Christ the Eucharist speaks. First Corinthians 10:3-4 speaks of “supernatural food” and “supernatural drink” and finds in the events at the sea and in the wilderness in the days of Moses foreshadowings of what Christians find in Christ. Christ said, “I am the bread of life,” and “My flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed”; thus what we have in John’s Gospel (Jn 6:35, 55, <span>rsv<\/span>) is close to what Paul implies about the Lord’s Supper expressing the truth of Christians spiritually feeding on Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","summary_en":"LORD’S SUPPER, The The supper Jesus shared with his disciples a few hours before he was arrested and taken to his trial and death (thus often called “The Last Supper”); the ceremony of partaking of the bread and wine that Christians have come to call the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:20), the breaking of bread (Acts 2:42, 46; 20:7), Holy Communion (from the expression of 1 Cor 10:16), the Eucharist (the Greek word for “thanksgiving,” see Mk 14:23), or the Mass. The apostle Paul speaks of handing on...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55314,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","summary_en":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82940,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","summary_en":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110566,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","summary_en":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138192,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:6","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:6-7<\/strong> <em>took<\/em>, <em>thanked God<\/em>, <em>distributed:<\/em> These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","summary_en":"8:6-7 took, thanked God, distributed: These terms foreshadow the Last Supper (cp. 14:22-25).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":5214,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blessing Bless","title_en":"Blessing Bless","content_ro":"<h3>BLESS, BLESSING<\/h3>\n<p>Pronouncement of the favor of God upon an assembled congregation. Worship services, especially observances of Holy Communion in Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and most Protestant churches, usually end with a blessing spoken by the senior clergyman present. This pronouncement (called “blessing” in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches and “benediction” in most Protestant churches) is based upon the widespread biblical precedent of blessing (Gn 27:27-29; Nm 6:22-27; Lk 24:50; 2 Cor 13:11, 14; Phil 4:7; 2 Thes 2:16-17; Heb 13:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The practice of benediction or blessing is often regarded merely as a ritual of dismissal, but it is actually a pronouncement of God’s gracious favor, to be given only by his ministers on the authority of Holy Scripture to faithful believers. In this action Christians are assured that the grace of God the Father, the love of the Son, and the communion of the Holy Spirit are with them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blessing” is also applied to thanksgiving for food and drink (Mt 14:19; Mk 8:7; Lk 24:30).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Beatitudes, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLESS, BLESSING<\/h3>\n<p>Pronouncement of the favor of God upon an assembled congregation. Worship services, especially observances of Holy Communion in Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and most Protestant churches, usually end with a blessing spoken by the senior clergyman present. This pronouncement (called “blessing” in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches and “benediction” in most Protestant churches) is based upon the widespread biblical precedent of blessing (Gn 27:27-29; Nm 6:22-27; Lk 24:50; 2 Cor 13:11, 14; Phil 4:7; 2 Thes 2:16-17; Heb 13:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The practice of benediction or blessing is often regarded merely as a ritual of dismissal, but it is actually a pronouncement of God’s gracious favor, to be given only by his ministers on the authority of Holy Scripture to faithful believers. In this action Christians are assured that the grace of God the Father, the love of the Son, and the communion of the Holy Spirit are with them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blessing” is also applied to thanksgiving for food and drink (Mt 14:19; Mk 8:7; Lk 24:30).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Beatitudes, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLESS, BLESSING Pronouncement of the favor of God upon an assembled congregation. Worship services, especially observances of Holy Communion in Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and most Protestant churches, usually end with a blessing spoken by the senior clergyman present. This pronouncement (called “blessing” in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches and “benediction” in most Protestant churches) is based upon the widespread biblical precedent of blessing (Gn 27:27-29;...","summary_en":"BLESS, BLESSING Pronouncement of the favor of God upon an assembled congregation. Worship services, especially observances of Holy Communion in Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and most Protestant churches, usually end with a blessing spoken by the senior clergyman present. This pronouncement (called “blessing” in the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican churches and “benediction” in most Protestant churches) is based upon the widespread biblical precedent of blessing (Gn 27:27-29;...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":55315,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:8","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","summary_en":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82941,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:8","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","summary_en":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110567,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:8","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","summary_en":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138193,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:8","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:8<\/strong> <em>They ate as much as they wanted:<\/em> The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","summary_en":"8:8 They ate as much as they wanted: The superabundance of food shows the all-surpassing nature of God’s Kingdom and of the one who brought it.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":8453,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Dalmanutha","title_en":"Dalmanutha","content_ro":"<h3>DALMANUTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources record Magadan or Magdala. The parallel passage in Matthew 15:39 cites Magadan. Because of this, the exact name and location have been difficult to pinpoint. Probably the various names are meant to designate the same site or at least two places in the same area.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Magadan; Magdala.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DALMANUTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources record Magadan or Magdala. The parallel passage in Matthew 15:39 cites Magadan. Because of this, the exact name and location have been difficult to pinpoint. Probably the various names are meant to designate the same site or at least two places in the same area.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Magadan; Magdala.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DALMANUTHA Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there. The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources reco...","summary_en":"DALMANUTHA Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there. The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources reco...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24320,"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":55316,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","summary_en":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82942,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","summary_en":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110568,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","summary_en":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138194,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:10","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:10-13<\/strong> As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em> is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has <em>Magadan<\/em> instead of <em>Dalmanutha<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","summary_en":"8:10-13 As in the earlier feeding miracle (6:30-44), the feeding of the 4,000 is followed by Jesus’ crossing the Sea of Galilee by boat (cp. 6:45) and the Pharisees’ initiating a dispute demanding that Jesus perform some miraculous sign (cp. 7:1-23). • The location of Dalmanutha is unknown. Matthew 15:39 has Magadan instead of Dalmanutha.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":42053,"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":69679,"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":97305,"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":124931,"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":24381,"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":25982,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Miracle","title_en":"Miracle","content_ro":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MIRACLE<\/h3>\n<p>A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scripture the element of faith is crucial; a natural approach cannot prove or disprove the presence of “miracle.” The timing and content of the process can be miraculous, even though the event may seem natural. The revelatory significance is also important. In every case God performed the miracle not merely as a “wonder” to inspire awe but as a “sign” to draw people to himself.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheVocabularyofMiracles\">The Vocabulary of Miracles<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the two main terms are “sign” and “wonder,” which often occur together (e.g., nine times in Dt alone, 4:34; 13:1; etc.). More than one Hebrew term is used for “wonder”—one referring to it as an act of supernatural power and another as being beyond man’s understanding. On the whole, they are used synonymously for God’s providential acts within history. The “sign” refers to an act that occurs as a token or pledge of God’s control over events and as a revelation of God’s presence with his people.<\/p>\n<p>The NT uses the same basic idiom, “signs and wonders,” with the same general thrust (cf. Mt 24:24; Mk 13:22; Jn 4:48; Acts 2:43). A third term is that for “power” or miracle, and this becomes the predominant term in the synoptic Gospels. It signifies the mighty act itself by which God is revealed in Christ. A fourth term is “work,” which along with “sign” is preferred in the Gospel of John. This term is used in John to show that in Jesus the work of the Father is revealed. While the terms are often synonymous (the first three occur together in Rom 15:19-20; 2 Thes 2:9; Heb 2:4), they designate three different aspects of miracles. “Signs” point to the theological meaning of miracle as a revelation of God; “power,” to the force behind the act; “work,” to the person behind it; and “wonder,” to its awesome effect on the observer.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheOldTestament\">Miracles in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>To the Hebrew, a miracle was nothing more nor less than an act of God. Therefore, nature herself was a miracle (Jb 5:9-10; Pss 89:6; 106:2), and an act of kindness or victory over one’s enemies is so described (Gn 24:12-27; 1 Sm 14:23). The natural order is totally under Yahweh’s control, so a miracle was observable not because of its supernatural nature but because of its character as part of the divine revelation. This connection with salvation history is crucial, for Israel at all times tried to guard against a desire for the spectacular. Deuteronomy 13:1-4 warns against accepting a wonder as authenticating a prophet; rather, the authentication must come from the fact that he worships Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles in the OT are restricted to critical periods of redemptive history. Many have discussed the act of Creation as the first miracle, but in actuality it is not presented as such in the Genesis account. A miracle is signified by its revelatory significance and\/or its connection with crucial points in the history of God’s people—the exodus, the conquest of Jordan, the battle against the insidious Baal worship of the prophetic period. Creation is characterized by one major theme: a chronicle of the beginnings. The miracles of Genesis—striking blind the inhabitants of Sodom, the Flood, Babel—all signify the wrath of God upon those who have turned against him. This is the other side of redemptive history, the judgment of God upon those who are not his people.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles of the exodus account have two foci: The plagues represent the absolute power of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt, and the miracles of the wilderness show God’s absolute care and protection of his people. The plagues are particularly interesting because each one is directed at one of the gods of Egypt and reveals Yahweh as the only potentate. The basic theme is found in Exodus 7:5 and is repeated throughout the account (cf. 7:17; 8:6, 18; 9:14-16, 29; 12:12): “When I show the Egyptians my power and force them to let the Israelites go, they will realize that I am the <span>Lord<\/span>” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In this regard they were directed not only at the Egyptians but also to the Israelites, who needed to know that their God would vindicate them against the Egyptians. This is borne out in the major miracle, the crossing of the Red Sea. The plagues themselves show a gradual increase in severity.<\/p>\n<p>The wilderness miracles are intimately connected to the basic theme of the wandering narratives, the trial of Israel in times of desperate need and God’s providential protection of his people when they turn to him. The basic organization of the stories concerns the need itself, which leads to Israel’s complaint; this is followed by Moses’ intercession and then by God’s sovereign intervention. The miracles are interspersed with other stories that tell of God’s punishment when the people’s murmuring tries him too far. The miracle is God’s self-revelation regarding his involvement in the needs of his own; Israel must then respond, and her response determines her blessing or punishment at the hands of Yahweh.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are conspicuously absent in the period of the united monarchy. This was a time of self-sufficiency, when God worked through the monarchy and did not intervene directly in the life of the nation. The reason is that Israel’s eschatological hopes had been realized and made concrete in the presence of the Holy City and the temple.<\/p>\n<p>It was different during the prophetic period. In the lives of Elijah and Elisha, miracles were predominant. This was a time of apostasy, and under the reign of Ahab and Jezebel the nation turned to paganism and the worship of Baal. The very existence of the Hebraic religion seemed to be threatened, and so the times called for extraordinary measures. Here the wondrous nature of the miracles is more evident than anywhere else in the OT. There are conscious allusions to the exodus miracles, perhaps looking to Elijah as a new Moses reinstituting the true worship of Yahweh. Parallels are seen in the challenge to the priests of Baal (1 Kgs 18; cf. Ex 7); the revelation of God on Mt Horeb with the wind, earthquake, and fire (1 Kgs 19; cf. Ex 19); and the parting of the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:10-14; cf. Ex 14). Many of the miracles were intended to demonstrate the impotence of Baal, such as the drought, the contest on Mt Carmel, and the miraculous sustenance supplied by God. Again, God’s actions within history were part of his self-revelation, the vindication of his messengers, and the punishment of his enemies.<\/p>\n<p>Miracles are infrequent in the writing prophets, perhaps due to the proclamation form of the writings (i.e., they dealt with message rather than deeds). The two major exceptions (apart from the recovery of Hezekiah chronicled in Is 38) are Jonah and Daniel. In Jonah, the miracle is addressed not to the Ninevites but to the Israelites, who are called back to their covenant obligations as the spokesmen for Yahweh. In Daniel the direction is reversed, and the situation is the same as that in Exodus or Kings. The miracles are directed to the Babylonians and Persians and have the same foci as the earlier events of the exodus and Elijah-Elisha chronicles, that is, the supremacy of Yahweh over the foreign gods and the vindication of his messengers. This is the third and final time of crisis and illustrates the major theological use of miracles in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MiraclesintheNewTestament\">Miracles in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The presence of the miraculous has a similar purpose in the NT; it occurred at a crisis point in salvation history to authenticate the presence of God in historical acts. It differs, however, in that it is transcended by the presence of the very Son of God, who himself is the greatest miracle of all. God now has not only acted in history; he has entered history and has turned it to himself. The parallels with the exodus events are obvious and show that the miracles of Jesus paved the way for the entrance of the new covenant in the same way that the exodus miracles prepared for the old.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Jesus’ Understanding<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus stressed the connection between his miraculous ministry, especially the casting out of demons (exorcism), and the coming of the kingdom of God. As in the OT, the miracles signify the presence of God, but here it is more direct and also signals the inauguration of his kingdom (Mt 12:28). As such, then, the exorcism miracles mean the binding of Satan and the institution of the reign of God (Mk 3:23-27). At the same time all the miracles signify the dawning of the age of salvation, as expressed in Jesus’ inaugural address at Nazareth (Lk 4:18-21, from Is 61:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Yet these miracles are not automatic signposts to the act of God; they must be interpreted by faith. Jesus was well aware of the presence of other miracles in his day (Mt 12:27) and so stressed the presence of faith in the healing miracles (Mk 5:32; 10:52). This faith must be directed to the presence of God in the event and in Jesus himself. The necessity of faith also helps to understand Jesus’ refusal to provide his contemporaries with a “sign” (Mk 8:11-12); miracles could never “prove” the presence of God. For a better understanding of the connection between faith and miracles, it is best to note each Evangelist’s individual portrait of the theological use of miracles.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Mark<\/h5>\n<p>Mark, the first of the four Gospels to be written, has often been called the “action Gospel” because of its emphasis on Jesus’ deeds rather than his teaching. This is also true regarding Jesus’ miracles, for Mark contains more proportionately than any of the others. There are five groups or five kinds of miracles in Mark. The first group centers on Jesus’ authority over demons (Mk 1:21-39). The second concerns Jesus’ authority over the law and conflict with his opponents (1:40–3:6). They result in fame but occasion his refusal to allow his true identity as Son of God to be known. The third group (3:7-30) contains exorcisms and the Beelzebub controversy, centering on his power over Satan. The fourth group (4:35–6:43) contains especially powerful miracles (stilling the storm, the Gaderene demoniac, the raising of Jairus’s daughter) and probably centers on the disciples, as Jesus thereby reveals to them the meaning of the kingdom and seeks to overcome their own spiritual dullness. The fifth and final group (6:30–8:26) continues the theme of the disciples’ misunderstanding and prepares the way for the Passion, with the message regarding the bread, blindness, and the judgment of God.<\/p>\n<p>The miracles in Mark center on conflict, first with Jesus’ opponents and then with his own disciples. While the miracles are harbingers of God’s kingdom, their purpose is to force an encounter with Jesus’ true significance. They do not show Jesus as a Hellenistic wonder worker; in fact, they lead only to amazement and then disbelief in those who do not have faith. Jesus’ personhood has been hidden and can only be understood in light of the cross. The miracles are not proofs but powers; God does not authenticate himself through them but shows himself to those with eyes to see.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Matthew<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s is the teaching Gospel, where dialogue takes precedence over action. Matthew compresses Mark’s narrative in order to make room for didactic material. Therefore, his stress is on the theological implications of faith rather than on the results they contain. Matthew’s groups of miracles are isometric to teaching passages, in keeping with his general practice of combining narrative portions and organizing them around didactic sections. The first group (chs 8–9) combines miracles from Mark’s first, second, and fourth groups and stresses Jesus’ significance as the servant of Yahweh who exercises sovereign power and forgives sins. The secondary theme teaches discipleship and shows the awakening faith of the disciples and their involvement in Jesus’ ministry. The second group (ch 12) centers on his authority over the law (the man with the withered hand) and over Satan (the Beelzebub controversy). The third group (chs 14–15) parallels Mark’s fifth group but has a different purpose. Rather than arousing conflict, the disciples are seen in positive guise, actively involved in the Master’s work. So the disciples become the means by which Jesus’ ministry is continued. Therefore, the disciples are involved as “learners” (the meaning of “disciple”) in his miraculous ministry.<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in Luke<\/h5>\n<p>Luke-Acts is remarkable and extremely important because it establishes beyond dispute the early church’s belief that it was in absolute continuity with Jesus and was continuing the work of God in the world. Luke’s major stress is on salvation history, and so one of his major stylistic methods for showing this direct connection is miraculous deeds. Especially enlightening here is Acts 9:32-42, where in two healing miracles Peter duplicated the Lord’s miracles (the paralytic Aeneas, Lk 5:18-26; the raising of Dorcas, Lk 8:49-56).<\/p>\n<p>From this respect also Luke returns to Mark’s interest in the deed more than the teaching. However, Luke goes even further than Mark, for the miracles validate Jesus more directly. The first group follows the inaugural address (4:18-22), which itself presents the miraculous deeds as authenticating signposts to Jesus’ personhood. They center on Jesus’ power and authority (vv 31-41) and validate God’s power in Jesus (5:17; 8:39) as well as faith in Jesus (seen in the “praise” motif, 5:25; 7:16; etc., but especially in Acts 9:35; 13:12; 19:17). The presence of “fear” at the miracles is a human response to having witnessed God’s power (Lk 5:26; 7:16; 8:35-37; 24:5). The call to the disciples occurs in the presence of miracles (5:1-11, at the miraculous catch of fish; vv 27-28, after the healing of the bedridden paralytic).<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, Luke views miracles as having redemptive significance. However, this is not contrary to Mark’s picture. Luke still avoids picturing Jesus as a mere wonder worker; Jesus still refuses to satisfy people’s curiosity for an external sign (Lk 11:29-32; cf. also 9:9), and in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31) he teaches that the unbelieving heart can never be convinced by such events. Nevertheless, they can lead to repentance (10:13-16).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in John<\/h5>\n<p>John is the most directly theological of the Evangelists, and miracles are characteristically given a distinctive Johannine coloring. In the Synoptics, miracles are “acts of power” signifying the entrance of God’s reign into this world via Jesus; thereby, Jesus establishes Satan’s defeat and God’s sovereign control of history. John, however, contains no exorcisms, and the miracles are seen as “signs.” At the same time miracles are part of the larger category of “works” (the other term for miracles used in John), by which Jesus shows the Father’s presence in himself (Jn 10:32, 37-39; 14:10) and they give witness to Jesus as the sent one (5:36; 10:25, 38).<\/p>\n<p>John selects only seven “sign miracles” from many others (20:30) and uses them as part of the thematic development in the respective section of each. For instance, changing the water into wine is a messianic act, signifying the outpouring of the kingdom blessing in the ministry of Jesus, the Messiah (ch 2); the multiplication of the loaves builds upon the “bread of life” and points to the messianic banquet as spiritually present in Jesus (ch 6).<\/p>\n<p>The paradoxical nature of miracles in the Synoptics is even greater in John. He gives more stress to the wondrous nature of the events by providing such details as the stupendous amount of water changed into wine (2:6, approximately 120 gallons, or 454.2 liters); the distance over which Jesus’ healing power works (4:46, almost 20 miles, or 32.2 kilometers); the length of time the man of Bethesda had been lame (5:5, 38 years; cf. 9:1, where the man had been born blind); the amount of bread needed to feed the 5,000 (6:7, where Philip said 200 denarii, or days’ wages, would not have bought enough); and the proof of Lazarus’s death (11:39; he had already begun to decay). John has a great interest in the miraculous. Yet at the same time there is even greater stress on the inadequacy of miracles for faith. The miracles as “signs” have saving value and point to the true significance of Jesus but are related to an awakening faith and in themselves are insufficient (2:11; 4:50). They have christological force, looking to Jesus’ sonship and the Father’s authentication of him but are based on the soteriological decision of the individual. As “signs,” they contain the very presence of God in Jesus, the spiritual reality of the “sight” and “life” he brings (9:35-38; 11:24-26). Yet their purpose is to divide the audience and confront it with the necessity of decision. Two camps result—those seeking understanding and those considering only the outward aspects. Some refuse to consider the signs, and thus they reject them (3:18-21; 11:47-50), while others see them shallowly as mere wonders and fail to see in them the true significance of Jesus (2:23-25; 4:45). On the other hand, some view them with the eye of faith and go on to a realization of his personhood (2:11; 5:36-46; 11:42). In John the highest faith of all is that which does not need external stimulation (20:29).<\/p>\n<h5>Miracles in the Rest of the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>Apart from Acts, several passages in the NT speak of the value of miracles. Paul in 2 Corinthians 12:12 and Romans 15:18-19 considered them as “sign-gifts,” which authenticated the divine authority of the “true apostle.” He listed healing and miracles as specific “gifts of the Spirit” in 1 Corinthians 12:9-10. In Galatians 3:5 he considered them evidence for the presence of the Spirit. The author of the letter to the Hebrews in 2:4 said “God bore witness” to the true message of salvation via miracles. Therefore, in the apostolic age the miracles of God’s servants were seen more directly as authenticating signs of God’s action in his messengers.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sign; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","summary_en":"MIRACLE A divine act by which God reveals himself to people. The classical definition of miracle assumes that it is contrary to natural law, but this is a misnomer for two reasons. First, many of the miracles of the Bible used nature rather than bypassed it (e.g., the wind that parted the Red Sea, Ex 14:21). Second, there no longer is a concept of “absolute natural laws”; rather, a phenomenon that is not readily explainable may reflect laws that scientists do not yet fully understand. In Scri...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35332,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sign","title_en":"Sign","content_ro":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIGN<\/h3>\n<p>Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the Mosaic covenant. Thus, the wearing of the law on the wrist and forehead and the keeping of the Sabbath are considered signs of the relationship between Israel and God (Dt 6:8; 11:18; Ez 20:12, 20).<\/p>\n<p>The most numerous and significant usages of “sign” appear in relation to the OT prophetic ministry. Beginning with Moses, signs are used to confirm that God has spoken to the prophet. Thus, when Moses received the message of deliverance that he was to bring to the children of Israel in Egypt and the pharaoh, he was given two signs: his staff was changed into a serpent and his hand was afflicted with leprosy (Ex 4:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Signs and wonders were also used by false prophets. After a sign had been given and had come to pass, the leaders of Israel were to examine the message of the prophet to see if it led the people away from the true worship of God. If it did, the prophet who had given the sign was to be put to death (Dt 13:1-5).<\/p>\n<p>The character of the sign varies and often is miraculous. Some of the great miracles of the OT are prophetic signs—for example, the moving of the shadow back up the steps of Hezekiah’s palace to confirm Isaiah’s prediction that the king would recover from what was a mortal illness (2 Kgs 20:8-9; Is 38:21-22). Often the sign is predictive only, and the people can know whether the prophet has spoken the truth by whether or not the event comes to pass—for example, the prophet’s foretelling the death of both of Eli’s sons on the same day (1 Sm 2:34; see also 14:10; 2 Kgs 19:29; Is 37:30). Sometimes the sign was carefully timed, and the recipient was told that the appearance of the sign would show when to act to fulfill the prophetic message (1 Sm 10:7-9). At other times, the events predicted were acted out in the life of the prophet. These symbolic actions demonstrated the truth of the prophet’s message—for example, Isaiah’s nakedness for three years to demonstrate the fate of those who preached trust in Egypt’s power (Is 20:3; see also Ez 4:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT occurrences are much like those in the OT. There are references to heavenly signs that will occur as indications of the end of time, and those with special knowledge will understand that the end is drawing near (Mt 24:3, 30; Mk 13:4, 22; Lk 21:11, 25-26). These apocalyptic signs have no astrological connotations as in the OT. There is also mention of the sign as the seal of the covenant between God and Israel in reference to circumcision in Romans 4:11.<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT, the NT uses of signs are confirmations of the message given by God, and this message comes through the apostolic community to the church. Thus, there is great emphasis on the way God confirms the message of the apostles through their ability to perform signs and wonders (Acts 2:43; 4:30; 5:12; 8:13; 14:3; Rom 15:19; Heb 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus’ miracles are not called signs. Only in Acts 2:22 does Peter proclaim that Jesus’ message was attested by signs he performed. Rather, Jesus’ miracles are seen as acts of divine power and mercy. When the Jews ask for a sign, they are consistently refused, with the promise that the only sign they will receive is the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1; Mk 8:11-12; Lk 11:19, 30), a sign that refers to the death and resurrection of the Christ. As Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days (Mt 12:40).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, however, the miracles of Jesus are seen in a strikingly different light and are considered signs. Beginning with the changing of water into wine (Jn 2:1-11), the miracles are called signs and are intended to lead those who see them to faith (v 23). Jesus even laments that the people will not believe unless they see signs (4:48). John’s purpose in writing his Gospel is to present the signs of Jesus so that those who come to faith may do so through seeing these signs (20:30). The signs in the Gospel are expressly chosen because they lend themselves to the development of true faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John, the miracles of Jesus confirm the teaching of Jesus. In the synoptic Gospels, the miracles are seen as acts of mercy and divine power. In John they are carefully selected to demonstrate what Jesus has to tell the world about himself. In this respect, they are a bit like the symbolic actions of Isaiah and Ezekiel in that the action of the speaker dramatizes the message. After Jesus feeds the 5,000 with the five loaves of bread and the two fishes, he announces in the synagogue at Capernaum, “I am the bread of life which came down from heaven” (Jn 6:51). He tells them not to labor for the bread of this world that perishes. In much the same way, the healing of the man born blind is bound up with Jesus’ teaching that he is the light of the world (9:5). The resurrection of Lazarus prepares the way for Jesus to proclaim that he is the resurrection and the life (11:25). In John’s Gospel the signs are not only a demonstration of divine power but also a revelation of Jesus’ divine character. In addition to confirming his divine message, they also proclaim his personhood and mission.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","summary_en":"SIGN Word connoting a visible event intended to convey meaning beyond that which is normally perceived in the outward appearance of the event. In the Old Testament In a few instances in the OT, “sign” refers to the observances of heavenly bodies in an astrological sense (Gn 1:14; Jer 10:2), or to the “signs and wonders” as marks of the miraculous actions of God within the history of the world (Dt 4:34; 6:22; Neh 9:10; Ps 105:27; Jer 32:20). On other occasions, it is used as an insignia of the...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36187,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55317,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","summary_en":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82943,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","summary_en":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110569,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","summary_en":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138195,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:11","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:11<\/strong> The antagonism of <em>the Pharisees<\/em> was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after <em>sign<\/em> was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even to the Pharisees (3:22). What they sought was <em>a miraculous sign from heaven<\/em>—that is, directly from God—that would demonstrate once for all that Jesus was the Christ. No sign, however, could ever convince them of this. For those whose hearts were open to the truth, the miracles that Jesus had already done (Luke 7:22) were clear and irrefutable signs that Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. For those outside (Mark 4:11-12), no sign could make them believe (cp. Luke 6:19-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","summary_en":"8:11 The antagonism of the Pharisees was persistent (2:16-18, 24; 3:6; 7:1-5; 10:2; 12:13, 15). The request for a sign is at times acceptable (Judg 6:36-40; 2 Kgs 20:8-11; Isa 7:10-12; see also John 2:18-19), but in this case it was obstinate testing of God. • The sought-after sign was not a healing, an exorcism, a raising from the dead, or a nature miracle, for there had been many of these already, and Jesus’ ability to work such signs was well known (Mark 1:32-34, 45; 3:7-12; 6:53-56) even ...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":8454,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Dalmanutha","title_en":"Dalmanutha","content_ro":"<h3>DALMANUTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources record Magadan or Magdala. The parallel passage in Matthew 15:39 cites Magadan. Because of this, the exact name and location have been difficult to pinpoint. Probably the various names are meant to designate the same site or at least two places in the same area.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Magadan; Magdala.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DALMANUTHA<\/h3>\n<p>Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there.<\/p>\n<p>The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources record Magadan or Magdala. The parallel passage in Matthew 15:39 cites Magadan. Because of this, the exact name and location have been difficult to pinpoint. Probably the various names are meant to designate the same site or at least two places in the same area.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Magadan; Magdala.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DALMANUTHA Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there. The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources reco...","summary_en":"DALMANUTHA Area on the west side of the Sea of Galilee near the southern end of the plain of Gennesaret. Its exact location is uncertain. Jesus and his disciples stayed there briefly after the incident of the feeding of the 4,000 (Mk 8:10). The Pharisees came to him seeking a sign from heaven in order to test him. After his answer that no sign would be given to this generation (v 12), he departed from there. The word “Dalmanutha” is present in the best manuscripts, although other sources reco...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24334,"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":55318,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","summary_en":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82944,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","summary_en":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110570,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","summary_en":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138196,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:12","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:12<\/strong> <em>I tell you the truth:<\/em> Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I <em>give this generation any such sign.<\/em>” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes <em>this generation<\/em> as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","summary_en":"8:12 I tell you the truth: Jesus’ response was as strong as an oath meaning, “[May God’s judgment fall upon me] if I give this generation any such sign.” Such oaths express an unbending commitment (see Gen 14:22-23; Num 32:10-11; Ruth 1:17; 1 Sam 3:17; 20:13; 2 Sam 3:35; 19:13). • Jesus elsewhere describes this generation as “adulterous and sinful” (Mark 8:38) and “faithless” (9:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":24382,"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}],"14":[{"id":55319,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","summary_en":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55320,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","summary_en":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82945,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","summary_en":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82946,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","summary_en":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110571,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","summary_en":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110572,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","summary_en":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138197,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14-21<\/strong> This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not <em>see<\/em><em>,<\/em> <em>hear<\/em><em>,<\/em> or <em>understand<\/em> because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","summary_en":"8:14-21 This account of the journey across the Sea of Galilee reflects on Jesus’ greatness, as manifested in the two feeding miracles, and emphasizes the dullness of the disciples, who do not see, hear, or understand because of their hardened hearts (see 4:9-20; 6:52).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138198,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:14","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:14<\/strong> The reference to having <em>only one loaf of bread<\/em> reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","summary_en":"8:14 The reference to having only one loaf of bread reminds readers of recent occasions when the disciples had not had enough bread and Jesus miraculously provided enough bread to feed thousands of people.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":42251,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Herod Antipas","title_en":"Herod Antipas","content_ro":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","summary_en":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69877,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Herod Antipas","title_en":"Herod Antipas","content_ro":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","summary_en":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97503,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Herod Antipas","title_en":"Herod Antipas","content_ro":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","summary_en":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125129,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Herod Antipas","title_en":"Herod Antipas","content_ro":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Herod Antipas<\/h3>\n<p>Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 <span>BC<\/span> to <span>AD<\/span> 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37). The city Tiberias was on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. Antipas completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas offended many Jews by divorcing his wife and marrying Herodias, the wife of his half brother, Herod Philip. Antipas’s marriage to Herodias was in violation of the law of Moses (Lev 18:16; 20:21) because Herod’s brother Philip was still alive. When John the Baptist spoke out strongly against this illegal marriage, Antipas imprisoned him (Mark 6:17-18); Herod was afraid John’s denunciation would lead to a political revolt (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2). Later, at a banquet, Herodias’s daughter pleased Herod with her dancing, evoking a rash promise from him to give her anything she wanted. Herodias took the opportunity to have John beheaded (Matt 14:1-12).<\/p>\n<p>It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s (see Mark 6:14-16; Matt 14:1-2; Luke 9:7-9), but he was reluctant to use force to bring about a meeting, for fear of arousing the people against him. Jesus, for his part, was openly critical of Herod Antipas (Mark 8:15; Luke 13:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus was finally arrested, Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, so he sent him to Herod Antipas, who was in Jerusalem for Passover. Pilate may also have been attempting to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Luke 13:1), and because Pilate had brought votive shields to Jerusalem that bore the image of Tiberius and were considered blasphemous by the Jews (Philo, <em>On the Embassy to Gaius<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, Herod only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate (Luke 23:6-11). The main political accomplishment of the incident was that Herod and Pilate were indeed reconciled (Luke 23:12).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas was later defeated in war by King Aretas, whose daughter he had divorced. (Jews interpreted this defeat as an act of divine judgment.) He was then deposed by Emperor Gaius in <span>AD<\/span> 39 and sent into exile, in response to accusations from Herod Agrippa I of Antipas’s conspiracy against Rome.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 14:1-12; Mark 1:14; 6:14-29; Luke 3:1, 19-20; 9:7-9; 13:31-33; 23:7-12, 15; Acts 4:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","summary_en":"Herod Antipas Herod Antipas, sixth son of Herod the Great, was ruler of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39, during the life of Jesus. His jurisdiction included the regions where Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries. Following the example of his father, Herod Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris, his first project, was the largest city in Galilee. It was Antipas’s capital city until he built Tiberias, named in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius (AD 14–37). The city Tibe...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16295,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Herodians*","title_en":"Herodians*","content_ro":"<h3>HERODIANS*<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish party mentioned three times in the Gospels in connection with two incidents (one in Galilee and one in Jerusalem) and associated with the Pharisees in their opposition to Christ. In Mark 3:6, after the healing of the man with the withered hand, the Pharisees went out and took counsel with the Herodians, plotting to destroy Jesus. In Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:13, the Pharisees and Herodians allied against Christ to entrap him with their question as to the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar. The Herodians are never mentioned in either Luke or John.<\/p>\n<p>The real problem comes in Mark 8:15, where it speaks of the “leaven of Herod.” Another reading is the “leaven of the Herodians.” However, the parallel passage in Matthew 16:6 speaks of the “leaven of the Sadducees.” Are the Sadducees and the Herodians the same?<\/p>\n<p>Matthew tends to label the religious leaders as Jesus’ opponents, whereas Mark emphasizes that Jesus’ opponents were both religious and political. What then is the significance of Matthew’s use of “the leaven of the Sadducees” in place of Mark’s “leaven of Herod” or “leaven of the Herodians”? Some have speculated that the Herodians were a political party composed principally of Sadducees. Some have identified them with the Sadducees, and others with the Boethusians, whose name more often than not was used interchangeably with that of the Sadducees. The Boethusians and the Sadducees were indistinguishable theologically, but the Sadducees were loyal to the Hasmonean dynasty, whereas the Boethusians were attached to the Herodian house and consequently were called the Herodians. Thus the Herodians had political affiliations with the Herodian house and religious affiliations with the Sadducees. Along with the Sadducees, the Herodians were men of influence—the aristocrats of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, during Jesus’ time the political differences between the Herodians and the Sadducees were not as distinct because of the marriage of the Herodian Herod Antipas to the Hasmonean Herodias. The Herodians and the Sadducees would have been on the same side politically against the Pharisees, the former being pro-government, while the Pharisees were both anti-Hasmonean and anti-Herodian. Congruent with this, Matthew 16:12 and Mark 8:15 represent the Pharisees and the Sadducees\/Herodians as contrary parties opposing Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the Herodians were also known as the Boethusians. Theologically they were in agreement with the Sadducees, but politically they were more pro-Herodian than the Sadducees. While the Pharisees looked for a cataclysmic messianic kingdom to remove the present Herodian rule, the Herodians worked to keep Herod’s dynasty in power.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HERODIANS*<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish party mentioned three times in the Gospels in connection with two incidents (one in Galilee and one in Jerusalem) and associated with the Pharisees in their opposition to Christ. In Mark 3:6, after the healing of the man with the withered hand, the Pharisees went out and took counsel with the Herodians, plotting to destroy Jesus. In Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:13, the Pharisees and Herodians allied against Christ to entrap him with their question as to the lawfulness of paying taxes to Caesar. The Herodians are never mentioned in either Luke or John.<\/p>\n<p>The real problem comes in Mark 8:15, where it speaks of the “leaven of Herod.” Another reading is the “leaven of the Herodians.” However, the parallel passage in Matthew 16:6 speaks of the “leaven of the Sadducees.” Are the Sadducees and the Herodians the same?<\/p>\n<p>Matthew tends to label the religious leaders as Jesus’ opponents, whereas Mark emphasizes that Jesus’ opponents were both religious and political. What then is the significance of Matthew’s use of “the leaven of the Sadducees” in place of Mark’s “leaven of Herod” or “leaven of the Herodians”? Some have speculated that the Herodians were a political party composed principally of Sadducees. Some have identified them with the Sadducees, and others with the Boethusians, whose name more often than not was used interchangeably with that of the Sadducees. The Boethusians and the Sadducees were indistinguishable theologically, but the Sadducees were loyal to the Hasmonean dynasty, whereas the Boethusians were attached to the Herodian house and consequently were called the Herodians. Thus the Herodians had political affiliations with the Herodian house and religious affiliations with the Sadducees. Along with the Sadducees, the Herodians were men of influence—the aristocrats of Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, during Jesus’ time the political differences between the Herodians and the Sadducees were not as distinct because of the marriage of the Herodian Herod Antipas to the Hasmonean Herodias. The Herodians and the Sadducees would have been on the same side politically against the Pharisees, the former being pro-government, while the Pharisees were both anti-Hasmonean and anti-Herodian. Congruent with this, Matthew 16:12 and Mark 8:15 represent the Pharisees and the Sadducees\/Herodians as contrary parties opposing Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the Herodians were also known as the Boethusians. Theologically they were in agreement with the Sadducees, but politically they were more pro-Herodian than the Sadducees. While the Pharisees looked for a cataclysmic messianic kingdom to remove the present Herodian rule, the Herodians worked to keep Herod’s dynasty in power.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HERODIANS* Jewish party mentioned three times in the Gospels in connection with two incidents (one in Galilee and one in Jerusalem) and associated with the Pharisees in their opposition to Christ. In Mark 3:6, after the healing of the man with the withered hand, the Pharisees went out and took counsel with the Herodians, plotting to destroy Jesus. In Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:13, the Pharisees and Herodians allied against Christ to entrap him with their question as to the lawfulness of paying...","summary_en":"HERODIANS* Jewish party mentioned three times in the Gospels in connection with two incidents (one in Galilee and one in Jerusalem) and associated with the Pharisees in their opposition to Christ. In Mark 3:6, after the healing of the man with the withered hand, the Pharisees went out and took counsel with the Herodians, plotting to destroy Jesus. In Matthew 22:16 and Mark 12:13, the Pharisees and Herodians allied against Christ to entrap him with their question as to the lawfulness of paying...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":22890,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Leaven*","title_en":"Leaven*","content_ro":"<h3>LEAVEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Israelites regularly ate leavened bread (Hos 7:4), but in the commemoration of the Passover they were forbidden to eat leavened bread or even to have it in their homes during the Passover season (Ex 13:7). This annual observance ensured that the people would not forget their hasty exodus from Egypt, when God’s command gave no time for the preparation of leavened bread. The people were forced to carry with them their kneading troughs and the dough from which they baked unleavened cakes to sustain them as they journeyed (Ex 12:34-39; Dt 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>Possibly because fermentation implied disintegration and corruption, leaven was excluded from all offerings placed on the altar to be sacrificed to God (Ex 23:18; 34:25). It was also not permitted in grain offerings (Lv 2:11; 6:17). Scripture does not tell us whether or not the showbread (or bread of the Presence) was unleavened, but the historian Josephus states that it was leavened (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 3.6.6).<\/p>\n<p>Two exceptions to this rule should be noted. Leaven could be used in offerings that were to be eaten by the priests or others. Leavened bread could accompany the peace offering (Lv 7:13), and it was sacrificed at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) because it represented the ordinary daily food that God provided for his people (23:17).<\/p>\n<p>The slow working of the leaven proved to be a problem during the agricultural stage of Hebrew development, especially during the first busy days of harvest. Unleavened dough, therefore, became increasingly common for ordinary baking. This practice was encouraged by the growth of the idea that leaven represented decay and corruption, as did other fermented things. This view excluded leaven as inconsistent with the concept of the perfect holiness of God. Plutarch was expressing a long-held belief current also among other peoples when he wrote, “Now leaven is itself the offspring of corruption and corrupts the mass of dough with which it has been mixed.” The apostle Paul quotes a similar proverb in 1 Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9.<\/p>\n<p>The significant thing about leaven is its power, which may symbolize either good or evil. Usually, though not always, leaven was a symbol of evil in rabbinic thought. Jesus referred to leaven in the adverse sense when he used the word to describe the corrupt doctrine of Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 16:6, 11-12) and of Herod (Mk 8:15). The leaven of the Pharisees is elsewhere identified as hypocrisy (Lk 12:1; cf. Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Paul applies the same concept to moral corruption, warning that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” and admonishing his readers to clean out the old leaven, that is, the vestiges of their unregenerate lives, and to live the Christian life with the “unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Christ uses the concept of leaven’s effect upon dough in its good sense to provide his disciples with a brief but memorable parable (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:20-21), wherein leaven illustrates the cumulative, pervasive influence of the kingdom of God on the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Food and Food Preparation; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LEAVEN*<\/h3>\n<p>Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast.<\/p>\n<p>The ancient Israelites regularly ate leavened bread (Hos 7:4), but in the commemoration of the Passover they were forbidden to eat leavened bread or even to have it in their homes during the Passover season (Ex 13:7). This annual observance ensured that the people would not forget their hasty exodus from Egypt, when God’s command gave no time for the preparation of leavened bread. The people were forced to carry with them their kneading troughs and the dough from which they baked unleavened cakes to sustain them as they journeyed (Ex 12:34-39; Dt 16:3).<\/p>\n<p>Possibly because fermentation implied disintegration and corruption, leaven was excluded from all offerings placed on the altar to be sacrificed to God (Ex 23:18; 34:25). It was also not permitted in grain offerings (Lv 2:11; 6:17). Scripture does not tell us whether or not the showbread (or bread of the Presence) was unleavened, but the historian Josephus states that it was leavened (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 3.6.6).<\/p>\n<p>Two exceptions to this rule should be noted. Leaven could be used in offerings that were to be eaten by the priests or others. Leavened bread could accompany the peace offering (Lv 7:13), and it was sacrificed at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) because it represented the ordinary daily food that God provided for his people (23:17).<\/p>\n<p>The slow working of the leaven proved to be a problem during the agricultural stage of Hebrew development, especially during the first busy days of harvest. Unleavened dough, therefore, became increasingly common for ordinary baking. This practice was encouraged by the growth of the idea that leaven represented decay and corruption, as did other fermented things. This view excluded leaven as inconsistent with the concept of the perfect holiness of God. Plutarch was expressing a long-held belief current also among other peoples when he wrote, “Now leaven is itself the offspring of corruption and corrupts the mass of dough with which it has been mixed.” The apostle Paul quotes a similar proverb in 1 Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9.<\/p>\n<p>The significant thing about leaven is its power, which may symbolize either good or evil. Usually, though not always, leaven was a symbol of evil in rabbinic thought. Jesus referred to leaven in the adverse sense when he used the word to describe the corrupt doctrine of Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 16:6, 11-12) and of Herod (Mk 8:15). The leaven of the Pharisees is elsewhere identified as hypocrisy (Lk 12:1; cf. Mt 23:28).<\/p>\n<p>Paul applies the same concept to moral corruption, warning that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” and admonishing his readers to clean out the old leaven, that is, the vestiges of their unregenerate lives, and to live the Christian life with the “unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Christ uses the concept of leaven’s effect upon dough in its good sense to provide his disciples with a brief but memorable parable (Mt 13:33; Lk 13:20-21), wherein leaven illustrates the cumulative, pervasive influence of the kingdom of God on the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Feasts and Festivals of Israel; Food and Food Preparation; Unleavened Bread.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LEAVEN* Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast. The ancient Israelites regularly ate l...","summary_en":"LEAVEN* Any substance that produces fermentation when added to dough. Leaven may signify the dough already infected by leaven, which was put into the flour so that the leaven could pass through the entire mass before baking, or it may refer to dough that had risen through the influence of the leaven. The early Hebrews apparently depended on a piece of leavened dough for transmission of the leaven; not until much later were the lees of wine used as yeast. The ancient Israelites regularly ate l...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55321,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","summary_en":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82947,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","summary_en":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110573,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","summary_en":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138199,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:15","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:15<\/strong> Matthew says that <em>the yeast of the Pharisees<\/em> refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to <em>Herod<\/em> could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","summary_en":"8:15 Matthew says that the yeast of the Pharisees refers to their false teaching (Matt 16:12). It could also refer to their unbelief and hardness of heart (Mark 8:10-13). The reference to Herod could point to his unwillingness to accept what he knew to be true (6:14, 16, 20).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":55322,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","summary_en":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82948,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","summary_en":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110574,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","summary_en":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138200,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:16","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:16<\/strong> The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of <em>bread<\/em> was irrelevant.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","summary_en":"8:16 The disciples completely missed the point of Jesus’ warning (8:15) and forgot that because Jesus was with them, their supply of bread was irrelevant.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":40198,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Spiritual Blindness","title_en":"Spiritual Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>Spiritual Blindness<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, <span>nasb<\/span>). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindness is related to “hardness of heart” (Mk 8:17-18; Eph 4:17-18) and is understood as the judgment of God both upon unbelievers (Rom 1:20-21) and upon Israel (Is 29:10; Rom 11:7-8). According to Paul, it is also the work of Satan, who “has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe” (2 Cor 4:4). Healing from spiritual blindness is a special gift of God’s grace through the “new birth” (Jn 3:3) and by seeing “the glorious light of the Good News” (2 Cor 4:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>","content_en":"<h3>Spiritual Blindness<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, <span>nasb<\/span>). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindness is related to “hardness of heart” (Mk 8:17-18; Eph 4:17-18) and is understood as the judgment of God both upon unbelievers (Rom 1:20-21) and upon Israel (Is 29:10; Rom 11:7-8). According to Paul, it is also the work of Satan, who “has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe” (2 Cor 4:4). Healing from spiritual blindness is a special gift of God’s grace through the “new birth” (Jn 3:3) and by seeing “the glorious light of the Good News” (2 Cor 4:4, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p><\/blockquote>","summary_ro":"Spiritual Blindness Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, nasb). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindn...","summary_en":"Spiritual Blindness Spiritual blindness is a figurative way of defining the lost and hopeless condition of sinful humanity. Such blindness includes willful rejection of God’s revelation in his creation and in Scripture, and an inability to see the truth of the gospel. Moses spoke of Israel’s apostasy as “blindness” (Dt 29:4); Isaiah called it “dim” eyes (see Is 6:10, nasb). Jesus charged the Pharisees with unbelief that made them “blind guides of the blind” (Mt 15:14; 23:16). Spiritual blindn...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55323,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","summary_en":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82949,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","summary_en":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110575,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","summary_en":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138201,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:17","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:17-20<\/strong> Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","summary_en":"8:17-20 Jesus asked eight questions that rebuked the disciples. They, of all people, should have been aware of the miraculous power of the Son of God. Although the disciples still remembered the feeding miracles, they never considered the implications for their immediate situation.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":55324,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","summary_en":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82950,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","summary_en":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110576,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","summary_en":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138202,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:19","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:19-20<\/strong> Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","summary_en":"8:19-20 Jesus’ questions precisely recalled the feeding miracles (6:30-44; 8:1-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":12854,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Fullness","title_en":"Fullness","content_ro":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FULLNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Common translation of the Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pleroma<\/span><em>.<\/em> The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context.<\/p>\n<h4>General Usage<\/h4>\n<p>In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mark’s Gospels of a patch that fills up a hole in an old garment (Mt 9:16; Mk 2:21), and in Mark of the pieces of fish that fill a basket (Mk 6:43; 8:20).<\/p>\n<h4>“Earth” Expressions<\/h4>\n<p>In several instances in the <span>kjv<\/span> the term is found in the phrase “the earth and its fullness” (Pss 24:1; 50:12; 89:11; 1 Cor 10:26) or “the sea and its fullness” (1 Chr 16:32; Ps 96:11-12), meaning “contents.” Beyond its obvious quantitative sense, the meaning in these expressions may reflect a qualitative character: the contents of the earth are good and special. The Hebrew mind viewed the created order as a reflection of the Creator (Pss 8:5-6; 19:1-6; Jer 23:24). Accordingly, whenever people entered into relationship with anything God had created, whether in work or meals or relationships, they also entered objectively into relationship with God, who had given those things. Thus, the Jews heard with horror the prophetic announcement of God’s intention to bring destruction upon “the land and all that fills it” (Jer 8:16; 47:2; Ez 12:19; 19:7; 30:12).<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle Paul’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The origin of Paul’s understanding and use of “fullness” as a significant theological term has been debated. It is held by some that the word was a technical term used by the Gnostics in reference to a realm of spiritual beings that bridged the space between the true God and an “evil” earth. Subsequently, false teachers came to view Christ as one among many deities who lived in that “fullness.” In order to correct the misunderstanding, Paul borrowed the term from his opponents and applied it to Christ. Jesus is not just one of the beings between God and humanity, Paul taught; rather, he is all there is (“the fullness”) between God and humanity (Col 1:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>Against that view it is argued that Paul used the term in several contexts where that interpretation is obviously inadequate (Rom 13:10; Eph 1:22-23). In addition, it is likely that Paul, with his Pharisaic Jewish background, would understand the term in light of its OT usage. Thus, Paul’s use of the term may be better understood as not borrowed from his opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Paul used the term four times in the book of Romans. It can be rendered “full inclusion” in reference to the total number of Jews (Rom 11:12) or Gentiles (v 25) who will come to God. In verse 12, however, the term is set in opposition to the “failure” and “trespass” of the Jews, who feel that righteousness is a matter of their Jewish heritage rather than faith. It may be that Paul used the term in reference to “complete obedience to God’s will.” Thus, in essence Paul said, “If their disobedience means this much good for the world, think of what their obedience will mean.” It is in this active sense that “fullness” is used in Romans 13:10. Love brings to realization all that the law intends. Similarly, Paul desires that his own life be a full expression of the gospel of Christ (15:29).<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Ephesians, the church is referred to as the “fullness of Christ” (Eph 1:22-23; 4:13), and “the fullness of God” (3:19). A variety of interpretations have been offered for this phrase: the church is filled, made complete or whole by Christ; the church possesses the attributes of Christ; the church is the agent through which Christ does all his work. The church is full of Christ in that it is the complete, continuing expression of his words and works (compare Col 2:10). In the book of Colossians, Paul used the term in reference to Christ; in him dwells the “fullness of God” (1:19; 2:9). These passages are often interpreted as proclaiming the equality of Christ with God. All of God’s attributes are contained in Christ. All that God is, Christ is.<\/p>\n<h4>The Apostle John’s Usage<\/h4>\n<p>The prologue to John’s Gospel states that the “fullness of Christ” is received by all believers (1:16). The exact nature of this fullness is defined in verse 14: “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth.” The Greek word for “fullness” here indicates plenitude and totality. The Gnostics used the word to describe the totality of all deities. John, as with Paul, used the word to describe Christ as the fullness, the plenitude of God, for all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in him bodily (see Col 1:19; 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>Since all of God’s fullness dwells in Christ, every spiritual reality is found in Christ. In Christ, believers lack nothing. Of course, no single believer could receive all that Christ is; it takes the body of Christ to appropriate Christ’s fullness and to express it (Eph 1:23). Nevertheless, each believer receives in measure the same content of that fullness. Christ is continually full; he never is depleted. No matter how much the believers receive of him, he keeps on giving. Believers do not need to seek any other source but Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","summary_en":"FULLNESS Common translation of the Greek term pleroma. The word carries various shades of meaning that must be determined by observing its use in context. General Usage In Greek usage outside the NT, the word means “that which fills.” It is found in reference to the cargo or crew that fills a ship, the people that make up a crowd, and the years that fill a person’s life. The philosopher Aristotle used the term to denote the population that fills a city. That sense is used in Matthew’s and Mar...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":24347,"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":55325,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","summary_en":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82951,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","summary_en":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110577,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","summary_en":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138203,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:21","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:21<\/strong> <em>Don’t you understand yet?<\/em> This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","summary_en":"8:21 Don’t you understand yet? This question implies a time when they would truly understand. Mark’s readers knew that Jesus’ resurrection would give the disciples understanding of Jesus’ identity and power (see, e.g., Acts 4:23-31).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":4552,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bethsaida","title_en":"Bethsaida","content_ro":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>BETHSAIDA<\/h3>\n<li>1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17).<\/li>\n<p>Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sources, chiefly the writings of Josephus, a first-century <span>AD<\/span> Jewish historian. Two Bethsaidas, one on each side of the Sea of Galilee, were once postulated because the reference in Mark mentions the feeding of the 5,000 as happening across the lake from Bethsaida, whereas in Luke it seems to have taken place near Bethsaida. One solution is that the miracle occurred in the district surrounding Bethsaida, but that the quickest way to reach the city itself was to cross part of the lake. Such an interpretation questions the traditional location of the miracle (et-Tabgha on the west shore, nearer to Capernaum) but is preferable to the proposal of two Bethsaidas so close to each other.<\/p>\n<p>Bethsaida was merely a fishing village until it was enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34), son of Herod the Great, after the death of Caesar Augustus. Philip was later buried there, according to Josephus. Bethsaida’s name was changed to Julias in honor of Julia, daughter of Augustus. That city was defended by Josephus when he was its military commander during the first Jewish revolt against Rome (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>Josephus wrote that Bethsaida was “at the lake of Gennesareth” but “near to the Jordan River.” He also said that it was in lower Gaulanitis, a district that touched the northeast quarter of the Sea of Galilee. There is, however, no ancient “tell” or ruin fitting the size or description of the city near either the lake or the river. A suggestion that the small harbor of el-’Araj is the site of Bethsaida has little archaeological support, but et-Tell, located about two miles (3.2 kilometers) from the lake, shows evidence of extensive Roman occupation and building activity. At present, et-Tell seems to be the most satisfactory candidate for identification of Bethsaida.<\/p>\n<li>2. A variant name for the pool at Jerusalem, otherwise called Bethesda or Beth-zatha. <em>See<\/em> Bethesda; Beth-zatha.<\/li>","summary_ro":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","summary_en":"BETHSAIDA 1. Town northeast of the Sea of Galilee. Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples: Andrew, Peter, and Philip (Jn 1:44; 12:21). Jesus announced that calamity would come upon Bethsaida because of its unbelief in spite of the mighty works he had done there (Mt 11:21-22; Lk 10:13). A blind man was healed in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), and nearby over 5,000 people were fed by the miracle of the loaves and fish (Mk 6:34-45; Lk 9:10-17). Bethsaida is mentioned in several ancient sou...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5227,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blindness","title_en":"Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","summary_en":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13266,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gaulanitis*","title_en":"Gaulanitis*","content_ro":"<h3>GAULANITIS*<\/h3>\n<p>Small province east of the Sea of Galilee, situated between Mt Hermon and the Yarmuk River and extending perhaps to the Jordan River. It took its name from the ancient town of Golan. Archaeologists have discovered extensive ruins 17 miles (27 kilometers) east of the Sea of Galilee, which they consider to be the remains of Golan. Moses named Golan as a city of refuge for Manasseh’s half-tribe east of the Jordan (Dt 4:41, 43), and Joshua assigned it to the Gershonite Levites (Jos 20:8; 21:27; 1 Chr 6:71). According to Josephus, Alexander Janneus suffered a heavy defeat in this place and later destroyed the town (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 8.2.3). Josephus also identified a Judas who led a tax revolt as being from Gaulanitis (18.1.1), whereas Luke called him a Galilean (Acts 5:37). Later, Josephus called him a Galilean as well (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.5.2; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.1). It is quite possible that this Judas lived in these places at different times.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, Philip inherited Gaulanitis, making his capital Bethsaida Julias, which he had rebuilt and named after Augustus Caesar’s daughter. Jesus traveled in this area (Mk 6:45; 8:22), and it remained under firm Roman control until <span>AD<\/span> 66, when the Jewish war broke out. Jewish revolutionaries subsequently hid in its heights and the Romans fought several campaigns here.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Golan; Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GAULANITIS*<\/h3>\n<p>Small province east of the Sea of Galilee, situated between Mt Hermon and the Yarmuk River and extending perhaps to the Jordan River. It took its name from the ancient town of Golan. Archaeologists have discovered extensive ruins 17 miles (27 kilometers) east of the Sea of Galilee, which they consider to be the remains of Golan. Moses named Golan as a city of refuge for Manasseh’s half-tribe east of the Jordan (Dt 4:41, 43), and Joshua assigned it to the Gershonite Levites (Jos 20:8; 21:27; 1 Chr 6:71). According to Josephus, Alexander Janneus suffered a heavy defeat in this place and later destroyed the town (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 8.2.3). Josephus also identified a Judas who led a tax revolt as being from Gaulanitis (18.1.1), whereas Luke called him a Galilean (Acts 5:37). Later, Josephus called him a Galilean as well (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 20.5.2; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.1). It is quite possible that this Judas lived in these places at different times.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, Philip inherited Gaulanitis, making his capital Bethsaida Julias, which he had rebuilt and named after Augustus Caesar’s daughter. Jesus traveled in this area (Mk 6:45; 8:22), and it remained under firm Roman control until <span>AD<\/span> 66, when the Jewish war broke out. Jewish revolutionaries subsequently hid in its heights and the Romans fought several campaigns here.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Golan; Herod, Herodian Family.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GAULANITIS* Small province east of the Sea of Galilee, situated between Mt Hermon and the Yarmuk River and extending perhaps to the Jordan River. It took its name from the ancient town of Golan. Archaeologists have discovered extensive ruins 17 miles (27 kilometers) east of the Sea of Galilee, which they consider to be the remains of Golan. Moses named Golan as a city of refuge for Manasseh’s half-tribe east of the Jordan (Dt 4:41, 43), and Joshua assigned it to the Gershonite Levites (Jos 20...","summary_en":"GAULANITIS* Small province east of the Sea of Galilee, situated between Mt Hermon and the Yarmuk River and extending perhaps to the Jordan River. It took its name from the ancient town of Golan. Archaeologists have discovered extensive ruins 17 miles (27 kilometers) east of the Sea of Galilee, which they consider to be the remains of Golan. Moses named Golan as a city of refuge for Manasseh’s half-tribe east of the Jordan (Dt 4:41, 43), and Joshua assigned it to the Gershonite Levites (Jos 20...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15621,"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":16289,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family* Herod, Herodian","title_en":"Family* Herod, Herodian","content_ro":"<h3>HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY*<\/h3>\n<p>Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to Rome to be tried by Caesar. Without a knowledge of the Herodian family, one can hardly have a proper understanding of the times of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Herodian Dynasty<\/p>\n<p>• Herod the Great<\/p>\n<p>• Archelaus<\/p>\n<p>• Antipas<\/p>\n<p>• Philip the Tetrarch<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa II<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHerodianDynasty\">The Herodian Dynasty (67–47 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>The Herodian dynasty became prominent during the confusion that resulted in the decay of the Hasmonean dynasty, the transference of Syria and Palestine to Roman rule, and the civil wars that marked the decay of the nation. Much of what we know about the Herods comes from the historian Josephus’s writings: <em>Antiquities of the Jews<\/em> and <em>The Jewish War.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodtheGreat\">Herod the Great (47–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<h5>As Governor of Galilee (47–37 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Herod the Great became governor of Galilee at 25 years of age. Although he gained the respect of both the Romans and the Galilean Jews for quickly capturing and executing the bandit leader Ezekias, some in Hyrcanus’s court thought that he was becoming too powerful and arranged to have him brought to trial. He was acquitted and released and thereafter fled to Sextus Caesar at Damascus. Sextus Caesar, governor of Syria, appointed Herod governor of Coele-Syria, and thus he became involved with Roman affairs in Syria. He remained in this position under a series of rulers and was successful in collecting taxes and suppressing various revolts. Thus, in 41 <span>BC<\/span> when Antony came to power under Octavius Caesar, after asking the advice of Hyrcanus II, Sextus appointed Herod and Phasael as tetrarchs of Judea.<\/p>\n<h5>As King (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>The reign of Herod is divided by most scholars into three periods: (1) consolidation from 37 to 25 <span>BC<\/span>; (2) prosperity from 25 to 13 <span>BC<\/span>; and (3) domestic troubles from 13 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The period of consolidation extended from his accession as king in 37 <span>BC<\/span> to the death of the sons of Babas, the last male representatives of the Hasmonean family. During this period, he had to contend with many powerful adversaries.<\/p>\n<p>The first adversaries, the people and the Pharisees, objected to his being an Idumean, a half Jew, and a friend of the Romans. Those who opposed him were punished, and those who took his side were rewarded with favors and honors.<\/p>\n<p>The second adversaries were those of the aristocracy who sided with Antigonus. Herod had executed 45 of the wealthiest and had confiscated their properties to replenish his own coffers.<\/p>\n<p>The third group of adversaries was the Hasmonean family. Herod’s chief problem was his mother-in-law, Alexandra. She was upset that he had not appointed another Hasmonean to the high priesthood to replace Hyrcanus, specifically her son Aristobulus. She wrote to Cleopatra, asking her to influence Antony to force Herod to remove the appointed high priest, Ananel, and replace him with Aristobulus. Finally, Herod gave way to the pressure. In the end, after a celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, Herod had Aristobulus drowned, making it look like an accident. Herod put Alexandra in chains and placed her under guard to keep her from causing him more trouble.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s fourth adversary was Cleopatra. When civil war broke out between Antony and Octavius, Herod wanted to help Antony. But Cleopatra persuaded Antony to set Herod in battle against the Arabian king Malchus, who had failed to pay tribute to her. When she saw Herod winning, she ordered her troops to help Malchus, hoping to weaken both parties to the breaking point so that she could absorb them both. After a catastrophic earthquake in his domain in 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Herod defeated the Arabs and returned home. Soon after, on September 2, 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Octavius defeated Antony in the Battle of Actium, resulting in the suicides of Antony and Cleopatra.<\/p>\n<p>The second period of Herod’s reign was one of prosperity (25–14 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a period of splendor and enjoyment interrupted by occasional disturbances. According to Josephus, the most noble of all Herod’s achievements was the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, begun in 20\/19 <span>BC<\/span> (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.8.1). Rabbinic literature claims, “He who has not seen the Temple of Herod has never seen a beautiful building” (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 4a). Prior to this, he had built theaters, amphitheaters, and racecourses for both men and horses. In 24 <span>BC<\/span> Herod built himself a royal palace and built or rebuilt many fortresses and gentile temples, including Strato’s Tower, later renamed Caesarea.<\/p>\n<p>During this time, he became very interested in culture and gathered around him men accomplished in Greek literature and art. Greek rhetoricians were appointed to the highest offices of the state. One of these was Nicolas of Damascus, Herod’s instructor and adviser in philosophy, rhetoric, and history. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married Mariamne, daughter of Simon, a well-known priest in Jerusalem (she will be referred to as Mariamne II).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, Herod’s rule was favorably accepted by the people. They were annoyed, however, by two things. First, he violated Jewish law by his introduction of the quinquennial games in honor of Caesar; and second, he built theaters and racecourses. He demanded a loyalty oath from his subjects, except for a privileged few. Also, he would not allow them to congregate freely for fear of a revolt. Despite these things, he had good control of the people and twice favored them by lowering taxes (in 14 <span>BC<\/span> he reduced taxes by one-fourth).<\/p>\n<p>The third period of Herod’s rule was clearly marked by domestic troubles (13–4 <span>BC<\/span>). By now he had married ten wives. His first wife, Doris, had only one son, Antipater. He repudiated Doris and Antipater when he married Mariamne I, allowing them to visit Jerusalem only during the festivals. He married Mariamne I in 37 <span>BC<\/span>. She was the granddaughter of Hyrcanus and had five children, two daughters and three sons. The youngest son died while in Rome, and the remaining two sons were to play an important role in this part of Herod’s reign. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married his third wife, Mariamne II, to whom one child was born, Herod (Philip). Malthace, his fourth wife, was a Samaritan and mother of two sons, Archelaus and Antipas. His fifth wife, Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was the mother of Philip the tetrarch. Of the remaining five wives, only Pallas, Phaedra, and Elpsis are known by name, and none played a significant part in the events of this period.<\/p>\n<p>Alexander and Aristobulus, the sons of Mariamne I, were his favorites. Immediately following their own marriages, troubles began within the Herodian household. Salome, Herod’s sister and mother of Berenice (wife of Aristobulus), hated these two sons, mainly because she wanted the position and favor they enjoyed for her own son. Herod decided to recall his exiled son Antipater to show Alexander and Aristobulus there was another heir to the throne. Antipater took full advantage of the situation and used every conceivable means to acquire the coveted throne. Finally, a man of bad character, Eurycles from Lacedaemon, took it upon himself to inflame the father against his two sons and vice versa. Soon other mischief makers joined Eurycles, and Herod’s patience became exhausted. He put Alexander and Aristobulus in prison and named Antipater heir.<\/p>\n<p>In his impatience to gain the throne, Antipater attempted to poison Herod. This plot failed when Pheroras, Herod’s brother, drank the poison by mistake. Herod put Antipater in prison and reported the matter to the emperor (c. 5 <span>BC<\/span>). At this time Herod became very ill with an incurable disease. He drew up a new will that bypassed his older sons, Archelaus and Philip, because Antipater had poisoned his mind against them also. He chose his youngest son, Antipas, as his sole successor.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this time that the wise men arrived in Judea, searching for the newborn king of the Jews. Herod instructed them to report to him the whereabouts of this child as soon as they found him. Being warned in a dream, they did not do so, but rather returned to their homes by another route. God warned Joseph (husband of the mother of Jesus) to flee to Egypt because of Herod’s intention to kill Jesus. Joseph took his family and left Bethlehem. Shortly after, Herod killed all the male children in Bethlehem who were two years old and under.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s disease grew increasingly worse. Permission came from Rome to execute Antipater, which he promptly did. He again altered his will, making Archelaus king of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; Antipas tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip tetrarch of territories east of Galilee. On the fifth day after Antipater’s execution, Herod died at Jericho in the spring of 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The people acclaimed Archelaus as their king.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Archelaus\">Archelaus (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6)<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace (a Samaritan) and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. Archelaus was faced with a multitude of problems. He had killed 3,000 people in putting down a revolution led by people avenging the blood of those killed by his father, Herod. Thus his rule got off to a bad start. At Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, another revolt broke out, which lasted about two and a half months and during which the temple porticoes were burned and the treasury was pillaged by the Romans. This unrest spread to the countryside of Judea and to Galilee and Perea.<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus treated both the Jews and the Samaritans brutally (<em>War<\/em> 2.7.3), a fact borne out by the Gospels. When Joseph returned from his flight to Egypt and learned that Archelaus was ruling Judea, he was afraid to go there and was warned against it by God; he took the infant Jesus to Galilee instead (Mt 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus’s tyranny finally caused the Jews and Samaritans to send a delegation to Rome and complain formally to Augustus. The fact that such bitter enemies as the Jews and Samaritans could cooperate in this matter indicates the serious nature of the complaint. Antipas and Philip also went to Rome to complain about him. Presumably they resented his neglect as their Roman representative for Palestine. Thus in <span>AD<\/span> 6 Archelaus was deposed and exiled to Vienna in Gaul (modern Vienne on the Rhône, south of Lyons). Antipas and Philip were allowed to continue their respective rules, and Archelaus’s territories were reduced to a province ruled by prefects or procurators.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antipas\">Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39)<\/p>\n<p>Antipas was the younger brother of Archelaus, born around 20 <span>BC<\/span>. Of all the Herodians, he is mentioned most in the NT because he ruled over Galilee and Perea, where both Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Antipas’s domain was in turmoil caused by the rebellion begun at Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. He immediately set out to restore order and rebuild what had been destroyed. Following the example of his father, Herod the Great, Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris was his first project; it was the largest city in Galilee and his capital city until he built Tiberias. Since Nazareth was only four miles (6.4 kilometers) south-southeast of Sepphoris, it is quite possible that Joseph, Mary’s husband, was employed as a carpenter (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3) to help rebuild that city.<\/p>\n<p>Of the 12 cities built by the Herodian family, Tiberias is the most important. It was the first city in Jewish history to be founded with the municipal framework of a Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">polis<\/span><em>.<\/em> It was built in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius. Due to the fact that a cemetery was destroyed in the process of building, Tiberias was considered unclean by the Jews. Antipas offered free houses, land and tax exemptions for the first few years to anyone who would move into the city. He completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian world the incident for which Antipas is most remembered is his beheading of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2.116-119). There was a tangle of family events leading up to the death of John the Baptist. Antipas had married the daughter of Aretas IV (the daughter’s name is unknown). Aretas IV was the Nabatean king, and Augustus may have encouraged this marriage since he favored intermarriages between various rulers to promote peace in his empire.<\/p>\n<p>Around <span>AD<\/span> 29 Antipas took a trip to Rome, and on the way he paid a visit to his half brother Herod Philip, who must have lived in a coastal city in Palestine. Antipas fell in love with Herodias, Philip’s wife, who was also Antipas’s niece. The idea of becoming the wife of a tetrarch appealed to her, and she agreed to marry him when he returned from Rome if he would oust Aretas’s daughter. Antipas agreed to the plan, and when Aretas’s daughter heard of it, she fled to her father. This was a breach of political alliance as well as a personal insult, which led to retaliation by Aretas.<\/p>\n<p>The marriage of Antipas and Herodias was in violation of the Mosaic law that forbade marriage to a brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21) except in order to raise children for a deceased childless brother by a levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; Mk 12:19). In this case, Philip not only had a child, Salome, but he was still alive. This is the situation that John the Baptist spoke so boldly against, and Antipas threw him in prison. Herodias’s hatred of John the Baptist was too great merely to settle for his incarceration. At an appropriate time, possibly Antipas’s birthday, she planned a banquet at Machaerus in Perea. Her daughter, Salome, danced for the king, and in an impulsive moment Antipas promised her under oath that he would give her anything, up to half of his kingdom. Following her mother’s advice, she asked for John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Immediately Antipas was sorry for his rash promise, but in order to save face in the presence of his underlords, he granted the request. Thus, John’s ministry ended around <span>AD<\/span> 31 or 32.<\/p>\n<p>There are three specific times when Antipas and Jesus are mentioned together in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Early in Jesus’ ministry Antipas heard of him and commented, perhaps with irony, that Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected (Mt 14:1-2; Mk 6:14-16; Lk 9:7-9). It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s, but he was reluctant to use force to bring about the meeting for fear of once more arousing the people against him. Eventually, Jesus withdrew from Antipas’s territories without the two meeting.<\/p>\n<p>Later, as Jesus became more popular, Antipas saw a potential threat to his own power and threatened to kill Jesus. Thus it was that on Jesus’ final trip to Jerusalem he was warned by some of the Pharisees that he should leave Antipas’s territories for his own safety (Lk 13:31-33). Jesus sent as answer to “that fox” that he would continue his ministry of healing and casting out demons for a little longer, and when he had finished, he would then go to Jerusalem to die. The lion and fox were often contrasted in ancient literature. The Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ, was not going to be coerced by the crafty coward, Antipas.<\/p>\n<p>The final encounter between the two occurred when Jesus was tried by Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 33 (Lk 23:6-12). Since this event is mentioned only by Luke, some scholars consider it legendary. It must be remembered, however, that Luke’s addressee was Theophilus, probably a Roman officer, who would be especially interested in the reconciliation between Pilate and Antipas mentioned in this passage.<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke’s account, when Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, he sent him to Antipas (who was celebrating the Passover in Jerusalem). Pilate thus freed himself from an awkward situation. A more subtle reason may have been to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Lk 13:1), and because Pilate brought votive shields into Jerusalem, arousing the anger of the Jews (Philo’s <em>Legatio ad Gaium<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, the ruler only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate. The main political accomplishment of the incident was Antipas and Pilate’s reconciliation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhiliptheTetrarch\">Philip the Tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34)<\/p>\n<p>Philip the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. When Herod’s will was resolved, Philip was made tetrarch over Gaulanitis, Auranitis, Batanea, Trachonitis, and Iturea, all in the northern part of Herod the Great’s domain (Lk 3:1). His subjects were mainly Syrian and Greek. Thus he was the first and only Herodian to have his image on his coins.<\/p>\n<p>He built two cities. First, he rebuilt and enlarged Paneas and renamed it Caesarea Philippi. Here Peter made his confession of faith to Jesus and was given the revelation of the church (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30). Next, he rebuilt and enlarged Bethsaida and renamed it Julias. Here Jesus healed the blind man (Mk 8:22-26), and in a nearby desert place he fed the 5,000 (Lk 9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>Philip was not as politically ambitious as his brothers. His rule was marked by tranquility and the loyalty of his subjects. When Philip died in <span>AD<\/span> 34, Tiberius annexed his territories to Syria. After Caligula became emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 37, he gave the territories to Agrippa I, brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaI\">Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44)<\/p>\n\n<p>Agrippa I was the son of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great and Mariamne I) and Berenice. He was born in 10 <span>BC<\/span> and was the brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I might be considered the black sheep of the Herodian family. While at school in Rome, he lived a wanton life, incurring many debts. In Rome he became a friend of Gaius Caligula and at one point stated that he wished Caligula were king rather than Tiberius. This was overheard and reported to Tiberius, who imprisoned him. He remained in prison until Tiberius’s death six months later.<\/p>\n<p>Upon Caligula’s accession to the throne, he released Agrippa and gave him Philip the tetrarch’s territories and the northern part of Lysanias’s territory as well as the title of king. The title of king aroused the jealousy of his sister Herodias, and that eventually led to her husband, Antipas’s, downfall. At that time (<span>AD<\/span> 39) Agrippa acquired all of Antipas’s territories and property.<\/p>\n<p>When Caligula died in <span>AD<\/span> 41, Agrippa curried the favor of the new emperor Claudius, whereupon Claudius added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s territory. This territory was once ruled by Agrippa’s grandfather, Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I is mentioned in the NT for his persecution of the early church in order to gain favor with the Jews (Acts 12:1-19). He killed James, the son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Peter. When Peter was released by an angel, Agrippa put the sentries to death.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 in Caesarea. Accounts of this incident are recorded both by Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 19.9.1.274–275; <em>War<\/em> 2.11.5.214–215) and the Scriptures. The incident occurred at Caesarea; he was wearing a sparkling silver robe, and when the people flattered him by calling him a god, he was suddenly struck with a mortal illness and died a horrible death. He was survived by his daughters, Bernice, Mariamne, and Drusilla, and by a son, Agrippa, who was 17 at the time. Because of Agrippa II’s youth, his father’s territories were temporarily made a province.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaII\">Agrippa II (<span>AD<\/span> 50–100)<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was the son of Agrippa I and Cypros. In <span>AD<\/span> 50, six years after his father’s death, Claudius made him king of Chalcis.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was in control of the temple treasury and the vestments of the high priest and thus could appoint the high priest. The Romans consulted him on religious matters, which is probably why Festus asked him to hear the apostle Paul at Caesarea (<span>AD<\/span> 59), where he was accompanied by his sister Bernice (Acts 25–26).<\/p>\n<p>In May <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Palestinian revolution began (<em>War<\/em> 2.14.4.284). When Agrippa’s attempt to quell the revolt failed, he became a staunch ally of the Romans throughout the entire war (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). During this time, Nero committed suicide, the new emperor Galba was murdered, and Vespasian became the emperor. After pledging his allegiance to the new emperor, Agrippa remained with Titus, Vespasian’s son, who was in charge of the war (Tacitus’s <em>History<\/em> 5.81). After the fall of Jerusalem (August 6, <span>AD<\/span> 70), Agrippa was probably present to celebrate the destruction of his own people.<\/p>\n<p>Following this, Vespasian added new territories to Agrippa’s kingdom, though just which ones is not known. In <span>AD<\/span> 79 Vespasian died and Titus became emperor. Little is known of Agrippa’s rule after this, except that he wrote to the historian Josephus praising him for <em>The Jewish War,<\/em> and he purchased a copy of it (Josephus’s <em>Life<\/em> 65.361–367; <em>Apion<\/em> 1.9.47–52).<\/p>\n<p>Although the Talmud implies that Agrippa II had two wives (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Sukkah<\/em> 27a), Josephus gives no indication that he had any wives or children. Rather, he was known for his incestuous relationship with his sister Bernice. He died around <span>AD<\/span> 100. His death marked the end of the Herodian dynasty.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herodians; Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY*<\/h3>\n<p>Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to Rome to be tried by Caesar. Without a knowledge of the Herodian family, one can hardly have a proper understanding of the times of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Herodian Dynasty<\/p>\n<p>• Herod the Great<\/p>\n<p>• Archelaus<\/p>\n<p>• Antipas<\/p>\n<p>• Philip the Tetrarch<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa II<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHerodianDynasty\">The Herodian Dynasty (67–47 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>The Herodian dynasty became prominent during the confusion that resulted in the decay of the Hasmonean dynasty, the transference of Syria and Palestine to Roman rule, and the civil wars that marked the decay of the nation. Much of what we know about the Herods comes from the historian Josephus’s writings: <em>Antiquities of the Jews<\/em> and <em>The Jewish War.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodtheGreat\">Herod the Great (47–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<h5>As Governor of Galilee (47–37 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Herod the Great became governor of Galilee at 25 years of age. Although he gained the respect of both the Romans and the Galilean Jews for quickly capturing and executing the bandit leader Ezekias, some in Hyrcanus’s court thought that he was becoming too powerful and arranged to have him brought to trial. He was acquitted and released and thereafter fled to Sextus Caesar at Damascus. Sextus Caesar, governor of Syria, appointed Herod governor of Coele-Syria, and thus he became involved with Roman affairs in Syria. He remained in this position under a series of rulers and was successful in collecting taxes and suppressing various revolts. Thus, in 41 <span>BC<\/span> when Antony came to power under Octavius Caesar, after asking the advice of Hyrcanus II, Sextus appointed Herod and Phasael as tetrarchs of Judea.<\/p>\n<h5>As King (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>The reign of Herod is divided by most scholars into three periods: (1) consolidation from 37 to 25 <span>BC<\/span>; (2) prosperity from 25 to 13 <span>BC<\/span>; and (3) domestic troubles from 13 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The period of consolidation extended from his accession as king in 37 <span>BC<\/span> to the death of the sons of Babas, the last male representatives of the Hasmonean family. During this period, he had to contend with many powerful adversaries.<\/p>\n<p>The first adversaries, the people and the Pharisees, objected to his being an Idumean, a half Jew, and a friend of the Romans. Those who opposed him were punished, and those who took his side were rewarded with favors and honors.<\/p>\n<p>The second adversaries were those of the aristocracy who sided with Antigonus. Herod had executed 45 of the wealthiest and had confiscated their properties to replenish his own coffers.<\/p>\n<p>The third group of adversaries was the Hasmonean family. Herod’s chief problem was his mother-in-law, Alexandra. She was upset that he had not appointed another Hasmonean to the high priesthood to replace Hyrcanus, specifically her son Aristobulus. She wrote to Cleopatra, asking her to influence Antony to force Herod to remove the appointed high priest, Ananel, and replace him with Aristobulus. Finally, Herod gave way to the pressure. In the end, after a celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, Herod had Aristobulus drowned, making it look like an accident. Herod put Alexandra in chains and placed her under guard to keep her from causing him more trouble.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s fourth adversary was Cleopatra. When civil war broke out between Antony and Octavius, Herod wanted to help Antony. But Cleopatra persuaded Antony to set Herod in battle against the Arabian king Malchus, who had failed to pay tribute to her. When she saw Herod winning, she ordered her troops to help Malchus, hoping to weaken both parties to the breaking point so that she could absorb them both. After a catastrophic earthquake in his domain in 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Herod defeated the Arabs and returned home. Soon after, on September 2, 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Octavius defeated Antony in the Battle of Actium, resulting in the suicides of Antony and Cleopatra.<\/p>\n<p>The second period of Herod’s reign was one of prosperity (25–14 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a period of splendor and enjoyment interrupted by occasional disturbances. According to Josephus, the most noble of all Herod’s achievements was the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, begun in 20\/19 <span>BC<\/span> (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.8.1). Rabbinic literature claims, “He who has not seen the Temple of Herod has never seen a beautiful building” (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 4a). Prior to this, he had built theaters, amphitheaters, and racecourses for both men and horses. In 24 <span>BC<\/span> Herod built himself a royal palace and built or rebuilt many fortresses and gentile temples, including Strato’s Tower, later renamed Caesarea.<\/p>\n<p>During this time, he became very interested in culture and gathered around him men accomplished in Greek literature and art. Greek rhetoricians were appointed to the highest offices of the state. One of these was Nicolas of Damascus, Herod’s instructor and adviser in philosophy, rhetoric, and history. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married Mariamne, daughter of Simon, a well-known priest in Jerusalem (she will be referred to as Mariamne II).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, Herod’s rule was favorably accepted by the people. They were annoyed, however, by two things. First, he violated Jewish law by his introduction of the quinquennial games in honor of Caesar; and second, he built theaters and racecourses. He demanded a loyalty oath from his subjects, except for a privileged few. Also, he would not allow them to congregate freely for fear of a revolt. Despite these things, he had good control of the people and twice favored them by lowering taxes (in 14 <span>BC<\/span> he reduced taxes by one-fourth).<\/p>\n<p>The third period of Herod’s rule was clearly marked by domestic troubles (13–4 <span>BC<\/span>). By now he had married ten wives. His first wife, Doris, had only one son, Antipater. He repudiated Doris and Antipater when he married Mariamne I, allowing them to visit Jerusalem only during the festivals. He married Mariamne I in 37 <span>BC<\/span>. She was the granddaughter of Hyrcanus and had five children, two daughters and three sons. The youngest son died while in Rome, and the remaining two sons were to play an important role in this part of Herod’s reign. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married his third wife, Mariamne II, to whom one child was born, Herod (Philip). Malthace, his fourth wife, was a Samaritan and mother of two sons, Archelaus and Antipas. His fifth wife, Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was the mother of Philip the tetrarch. Of the remaining five wives, only Pallas, Phaedra, and Elpsis are known by name, and none played a significant part in the events of this period.<\/p>\n<p>Alexander and Aristobulus, the sons of Mariamne I, were his favorites. Immediately following their own marriages, troubles began within the Herodian household. Salome, Herod’s sister and mother of Berenice (wife of Aristobulus), hated these two sons, mainly because she wanted the position and favor they enjoyed for her own son. Herod decided to recall his exiled son Antipater to show Alexander and Aristobulus there was another heir to the throne. Antipater took full advantage of the situation and used every conceivable means to acquire the coveted throne. Finally, a man of bad character, Eurycles from Lacedaemon, took it upon himself to inflame the father against his two sons and vice versa. Soon other mischief makers joined Eurycles, and Herod’s patience became exhausted. He put Alexander and Aristobulus in prison and named Antipater heir.<\/p>\n<p>In his impatience to gain the throne, Antipater attempted to poison Herod. This plot failed when Pheroras, Herod’s brother, drank the poison by mistake. Herod put Antipater in prison and reported the matter to the emperor (c. 5 <span>BC<\/span>). At this time Herod became very ill with an incurable disease. He drew up a new will that bypassed his older sons, Archelaus and Philip, because Antipater had poisoned his mind against them also. He chose his youngest son, Antipas, as his sole successor.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this time that the wise men arrived in Judea, searching for the newborn king of the Jews. Herod instructed them to report to him the whereabouts of this child as soon as they found him. Being warned in a dream, they did not do so, but rather returned to their homes by another route. God warned Joseph (husband of the mother of Jesus) to flee to Egypt because of Herod’s intention to kill Jesus. Joseph took his family and left Bethlehem. Shortly after, Herod killed all the male children in Bethlehem who were two years old and under.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s disease grew increasingly worse. Permission came from Rome to execute Antipater, which he promptly did. He again altered his will, making Archelaus king of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; Antipas tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip tetrarch of territories east of Galilee. On the fifth day after Antipater’s execution, Herod died at Jericho in the spring of 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The people acclaimed Archelaus as their king.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Archelaus\">Archelaus (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6)<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace (a Samaritan) and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. Archelaus was faced with a multitude of problems. He had killed 3,000 people in putting down a revolution led by people avenging the blood of those killed by his father, Herod. Thus his rule got off to a bad start. At Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, another revolt broke out, which lasted about two and a half months and during which the temple porticoes were burned and the treasury was pillaged by the Romans. This unrest spread to the countryside of Judea and to Galilee and Perea.<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus treated both the Jews and the Samaritans brutally (<em>War<\/em> 2.7.3), a fact borne out by the Gospels. When Joseph returned from his flight to Egypt and learned that Archelaus was ruling Judea, he was afraid to go there and was warned against it by God; he took the infant Jesus to Galilee instead (Mt 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus’s tyranny finally caused the Jews and Samaritans to send a delegation to Rome and complain formally to Augustus. The fact that such bitter enemies as the Jews and Samaritans could cooperate in this matter indicates the serious nature of the complaint. Antipas and Philip also went to Rome to complain about him. Presumably they resented his neglect as their Roman representative for Palestine. Thus in <span>AD<\/span> 6 Archelaus was deposed and exiled to Vienna in Gaul (modern Vienne on the Rhône, south of Lyons). Antipas and Philip were allowed to continue their respective rules, and Archelaus’s territories were reduced to a province ruled by prefects or procurators.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antipas\">Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39)<\/p>\n<p>Antipas was the younger brother of Archelaus, born around 20 <span>BC<\/span>. Of all the Herodians, he is mentioned most in the NT because he ruled over Galilee and Perea, where both Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Antipas’s domain was in turmoil caused by the rebellion begun at Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. He immediately set out to restore order and rebuild what had been destroyed. Following the example of his father, Herod the Great, Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris was his first project; it was the largest city in Galilee and his capital city until he built Tiberias. Since Nazareth was only four miles (6.4 kilometers) south-southeast of Sepphoris, it is quite possible that Joseph, Mary’s husband, was employed as a carpenter (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3) to help rebuild that city.<\/p>\n<p>Of the 12 cities built by the Herodian family, Tiberias is the most important. It was the first city in Jewish history to be founded with the municipal framework of a Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">polis<\/span><em>.<\/em> It was built in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius. Due to the fact that a cemetery was destroyed in the process of building, Tiberias was considered unclean by the Jews. Antipas offered free houses, land and tax exemptions for the first few years to anyone who would move into the city. He completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian world the incident for which Antipas is most remembered is his beheading of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2.116-119). There was a tangle of family events leading up to the death of John the Baptist. Antipas had married the daughter of Aretas IV (the daughter’s name is unknown). Aretas IV was the Nabatean king, and Augustus may have encouraged this marriage since he favored intermarriages between various rulers to promote peace in his empire.<\/p>\n<p>Around <span>AD<\/span> 29 Antipas took a trip to Rome, and on the way he paid a visit to his half brother Herod Philip, who must have lived in a coastal city in Palestine. Antipas fell in love with Herodias, Philip’s wife, who was also Antipas’s niece. The idea of becoming the wife of a tetrarch appealed to her, and she agreed to marry him when he returned from Rome if he would oust Aretas’s daughter. Antipas agreed to the plan, and when Aretas’s daughter heard of it, she fled to her father. This was a breach of political alliance as well as a personal insult, which led to retaliation by Aretas.<\/p>\n<p>The marriage of Antipas and Herodias was in violation of the Mosaic law that forbade marriage to a brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21) except in order to raise children for a deceased childless brother by a levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; Mk 12:19). In this case, Philip not only had a child, Salome, but he was still alive. This is the situation that John the Baptist spoke so boldly against, and Antipas threw him in prison. Herodias’s hatred of John the Baptist was too great merely to settle for his incarceration. At an appropriate time, possibly Antipas’s birthday, she planned a banquet at Machaerus in Perea. Her daughter, Salome, danced for the king, and in an impulsive moment Antipas promised her under oath that he would give her anything, up to half of his kingdom. Following her mother’s advice, she asked for John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Immediately Antipas was sorry for his rash promise, but in order to save face in the presence of his underlords, he granted the request. Thus, John’s ministry ended around <span>AD<\/span> 31 or 32.<\/p>\n<p>There are three specific times when Antipas and Jesus are mentioned together in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Early in Jesus’ ministry Antipas heard of him and commented, perhaps with irony, that Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected (Mt 14:1-2; Mk 6:14-16; Lk 9:7-9). It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s, but he was reluctant to use force to bring about the meeting for fear of once more arousing the people against him. Eventually, Jesus withdrew from Antipas’s territories without the two meeting.<\/p>\n<p>Later, as Jesus became more popular, Antipas saw a potential threat to his own power and threatened to kill Jesus. Thus it was that on Jesus’ final trip to Jerusalem he was warned by some of the Pharisees that he should leave Antipas’s territories for his own safety (Lk 13:31-33). Jesus sent as answer to “that fox” that he would continue his ministry of healing and casting out demons for a little longer, and when he had finished, he would then go to Jerusalem to die. The lion and fox were often contrasted in ancient literature. The Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ, was not going to be coerced by the crafty coward, Antipas.<\/p>\n<p>The final encounter between the two occurred when Jesus was tried by Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 33 (Lk 23:6-12). Since this event is mentioned only by Luke, some scholars consider it legendary. It must be remembered, however, that Luke’s addressee was Theophilus, probably a Roman officer, who would be especially interested in the reconciliation between Pilate and Antipas mentioned in this passage.<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke’s account, when Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, he sent him to Antipas (who was celebrating the Passover in Jerusalem). Pilate thus freed himself from an awkward situation. A more subtle reason may have been to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Lk 13:1), and because Pilate brought votive shields into Jerusalem, arousing the anger of the Jews (Philo’s <em>Legatio ad Gaium<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, the ruler only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate. The main political accomplishment of the incident was Antipas and Pilate’s reconciliation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhiliptheTetrarch\">Philip the Tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34)<\/p>\n<p>Philip the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. When Herod’s will was resolved, Philip was made tetrarch over Gaulanitis, Auranitis, Batanea, Trachonitis, and Iturea, all in the northern part of Herod the Great’s domain (Lk 3:1). His subjects were mainly Syrian and Greek. Thus he was the first and only Herodian to have his image on his coins.<\/p>\n<p>He built two cities. First, he rebuilt and enlarged Paneas and renamed it Caesarea Philippi. Here Peter made his confession of faith to Jesus and was given the revelation of the church (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30). Next, he rebuilt and enlarged Bethsaida and renamed it Julias. Here Jesus healed the blind man (Mk 8:22-26), and in a nearby desert place he fed the 5,000 (Lk 9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>Philip was not as politically ambitious as his brothers. His rule was marked by tranquility and the loyalty of his subjects. When Philip died in <span>AD<\/span> 34, Tiberius annexed his territories to Syria. After Caligula became emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 37, he gave the territories to Agrippa I, brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaI\">Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44)<\/p>\n\n<p>Agrippa I was the son of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great and Mariamne I) and Berenice. He was born in 10 <span>BC<\/span> and was the brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I might be considered the black sheep of the Herodian family. While at school in Rome, he lived a wanton life, incurring many debts. In Rome he became a friend of Gaius Caligula and at one point stated that he wished Caligula were king rather than Tiberius. This was overheard and reported to Tiberius, who imprisoned him. He remained in prison until Tiberius’s death six months later.<\/p>\n<p>Upon Caligula’s accession to the throne, he released Agrippa and gave him Philip the tetrarch’s territories and the northern part of Lysanias’s territory as well as the title of king. The title of king aroused the jealousy of his sister Herodias, and that eventually led to her husband, Antipas’s, downfall. At that time (<span>AD<\/span> 39) Agrippa acquired all of Antipas’s territories and property.<\/p>\n<p>When Caligula died in <span>AD<\/span> 41, Agrippa curried the favor of the new emperor Claudius, whereupon Claudius added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s territory. This territory was once ruled by Agrippa’s grandfather, Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I is mentioned in the NT for his persecution of the early church in order to gain favor with the Jews (Acts 12:1-19). He killed James, the son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Peter. When Peter was released by an angel, Agrippa put the sentries to death.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 in Caesarea. Accounts of this incident are recorded both by Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 19.9.1.274–275; <em>War<\/em> 2.11.5.214–215) and the Scriptures. The incident occurred at Caesarea; he was wearing a sparkling silver robe, and when the people flattered him by calling him a god, he was suddenly struck with a mortal illness and died a horrible death. He was survived by his daughters, Bernice, Mariamne, and Drusilla, and by a son, Agrippa, who was 17 at the time. Because of Agrippa II’s youth, his father’s territories were temporarily made a province.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaII\">Agrippa II (<span>AD<\/span> 50–100)<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was the son of Agrippa I and Cypros. In <span>AD<\/span> 50, six years after his father’s death, Claudius made him king of Chalcis.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was in control of the temple treasury and the vestments of the high priest and thus could appoint the high priest. The Romans consulted him on religious matters, which is probably why Festus asked him to hear the apostle Paul at Caesarea (<span>AD<\/span> 59), where he was accompanied by his sister Bernice (Acts 25–26).<\/p>\n<p>In May <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Palestinian revolution began (<em>War<\/em> 2.14.4.284). When Agrippa’s attempt to quell the revolt failed, he became a staunch ally of the Romans throughout the entire war (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). During this time, Nero committed suicide, the new emperor Galba was murdered, and Vespasian became the emperor. After pledging his allegiance to the new emperor, Agrippa remained with Titus, Vespasian’s son, who was in charge of the war (Tacitus’s <em>History<\/em> 5.81). After the fall of Jerusalem (August 6, <span>AD<\/span> 70), Agrippa was probably present to celebrate the destruction of his own people.<\/p>\n<p>Following this, Vespasian added new territories to Agrippa’s kingdom, though just which ones is not known. In <span>AD<\/span> 79 Vespasian died and Titus became emperor. Little is known of Agrippa’s rule after this, except that he wrote to the historian Josephus praising him for <em>The Jewish War,<\/em> and he purchased a copy of it (Josephus’s <em>Life<\/em> 65.361–367; <em>Apion<\/em> 1.9.47–52).<\/p>\n<p>Although the Talmud implies that Agrippa II had two wives (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Sukkah<\/em> 27a), Josephus gives no indication that he had any wives or children. Rather, he was known for his incestuous relationship with his sister Bernice. He died around <span>AD<\/span> 100. His death marked the end of the Herodian dynasty.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herodians; Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY* Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to...","summary_en":"HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY* Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24348,"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":55326,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:22","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","summary_en":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82952,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:22","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","summary_en":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110578,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:22","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","summary_en":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138204,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:22","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:22-26<\/strong> Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies <em>Bethsaida<\/em> as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It was relocated and given status as a city by Philip the Tetrarch (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.2.1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","summary_en":"8:22-26 Earlier, Jesus and the disciples set out unsuccessfully for Bethsaida (6:45); here, they arrive, and Jesus heals a blind man. Only Mark has this two-part healing; it might connect with the opening of the disciples’ spiritual eyes in the next account (8:27-38). • John 1:44 identifies Bethsaida as the home of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (see also John 12:21). This small fishing village, although technically part of Gaulanitis, was generally considered part of Galilee (John 12:21). It...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":5233,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blindness","title_en":"Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","summary_en":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55327,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","summary_en":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82953,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","summary_en":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110579,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","summary_en":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138205,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:23","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:23<\/strong> <em>spitting on the man’s eyes:<\/em> See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","summary_en":"8:23 spitting on the man’s eyes: See 7:33; cp. John 9:6-7. Attempts to diagnose the man’s exact medical condition are speculative and unprofitable, diverting attention from the miracle.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":55328,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","summary_en":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82954,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","summary_en":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110580,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","summary_en":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138206,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:24","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:24-25<\/strong> The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","summary_en":"8:24-25 The healing was not instantaneous—the man saw imperfectly at first. Jesus’ second laying on of hands brought complete healing. Who is this man who stills the sea and heals the blind? Peter reveals this in the next account—he is the Messiah (8:29).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":55329,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:26","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","summary_en":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82955,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:26","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","summary_en":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110581,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:26","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","summary_en":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138207,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:26","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:26<\/strong> The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","summary_en":"8:26 The story ends with Jesus telling the healed man to keep the event a secret (see 3:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65370,"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":92996,"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":120622,"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":148248,"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}],"27":[{"id":5898,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Caesarea Philippi","title_en":"Caesarea Philippi","content_ro":"<h3>CAESAREA PHILIPPI<\/h3>\n<p>City at the northern extremity of Palestine, on the southern slopes of Mt Hermon near the ancient city of Dan. Caesarea Philippi lies in a beautiful area on one of the three sources of the Jordan River, the Wadi Banias.<\/p>\n<p>In the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the place was called Panion because the Greek god Pan was worshiped in a cave there. It is mentioned by Polybius, a Greek historian, as the place where Syrian king Antiochus III defeated the Ptolemies of Egypt in an important battle about 200 <span>BC<\/span>. The Jewish historian Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.10.3) wrote that “Panium” was governed by Zenodorus; its cultic site was “a very fine cave in a mountain, under which there is a great cavity in the earth, and the cavern is abrupt, and prodigiously deep, and full of a still water; over it hangs a vast mountain, and under the caverns arise the springs of the river Jordan.”<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Zenodorus, Augustus Caesar gave the city to Herod the Great, who, according to Josephus, “adorned this place, which was already a very remarkable one” with a “most beautiful temple of the whitest stone.” When Herod died in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Philip was given the territory surrounding Panion, an area known as Paneas. Josephus (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.1) reported that “Philip built the city Caesarea, at the fountains of Jordan, and in the region of Paneas.” Philip made it his capital and named it Caesarea Philippi after the Roman emperor Tiberius Caesar and himself, thus distinguishing it from the larger Caesarea Maritima on the Mediterranean coast. Josephus (<em>War<\/em> 3.9.7) wrote that emperors Vespasian and Titus both “marched from that Caesarea which lay by the seaside, and came to that which is named Caesarea Philippi.”<\/p>\n<p>It was in Caesarea Philippi that the apostle Peter confessed Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:13-16; Mk 8:27-29).<\/p>\n<p>About <span>AD<\/span> 50, Agrippa II enlarged Caesarea Philippi and named it Neronias in honor of the emperor Nero. The modern name, Banias, derives from the Arabic difficulty in pronouncing Paneas.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CAESAREA PHILIPPI<\/h3>\n<p>City at the northern extremity of Palestine, on the southern slopes of Mt Hermon near the ancient city of Dan. Caesarea Philippi lies in a beautiful area on one of the three sources of the Jordan River, the Wadi Banias.<\/p>\n<p>In the second century <span>BC<\/span>, the place was called Panion because the Greek god Pan was worshiped in a cave there. It is mentioned by Polybius, a Greek historian, as the place where Syrian king Antiochus III defeated the Ptolemies of Egypt in an important battle about 200 <span>BC<\/span>. The Jewish historian Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.10.3) wrote that “Panium” was governed by Zenodorus; its cultic site was “a very fine cave in a mountain, under which there is a great cavity in the earth, and the cavern is abrupt, and prodigiously deep, and full of a still water; over it hangs a vast mountain, and under the caverns arise the springs of the river Jordan.”<\/p>\n<p>After the death of Zenodorus, Augustus Caesar gave the city to Herod the Great, who, according to Josephus, “adorned this place, which was already a very remarkable one” with a “most beautiful temple of the whitest stone.” When Herod died in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Philip was given the territory surrounding Panion, an area known as Paneas. Josephus (<em>War<\/em> 2.9.1) reported that “Philip built the city Caesarea, at the fountains of Jordan, and in the region of Paneas.” Philip made it his capital and named it Caesarea Philippi after the Roman emperor Tiberius Caesar and himself, thus distinguishing it from the larger Caesarea Maritima on the Mediterranean coast. Josephus (<em>War<\/em> 3.9.7) wrote that emperors Vespasian and Titus both “marched from that Caesarea which lay by the seaside, and came to that which is named Caesarea Philippi.”<\/p>\n<p>It was in Caesarea Philippi that the apostle Peter confessed Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:13-16; Mk 8:27-29).<\/p>\n<p>About <span>AD<\/span> 50, Agrippa II enlarged Caesarea Philippi and named it Neronias in honor of the emperor Nero. The modern name, Banias, derives from the Arabic difficulty in pronouncing Paneas.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CAESAREA PHILIPPI City at the northern extremity of Palestine, on the southern slopes of Mt Hermon near the ancient city of Dan. Caesarea Philippi lies in a beautiful area on one of the three sources of the Jordan River, the Wadi Banias. In the second century BC, the place was called Panion because the Greek god Pan was worshiped in a cave there. It is mentioned by Polybius, a Greek historian, as the place where Syrian king Antiochus III defeated the Ptolemies of Egypt in an important battle ...","summary_en":"CAESAREA PHILIPPI City at the northern extremity of Palestine, on the southern slopes of Mt Hermon near the ancient city of Dan. Caesarea Philippi lies in a beautiful area on one of the three sources of the Jordan River, the Wadi Banias. In the second century BC, the place was called Panion because the Greek god Pan was worshiped in a cave there. It is mentioned by Polybius, a Greek historian, as the place where Syrian king Antiochus III defeated the Ptolemies of Egypt in an important battle ...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16288,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family* Herod, Herodian","title_en":"Family* Herod, Herodian","content_ro":"<h3>HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY*<\/h3>\n<p>Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to Rome to be tried by Caesar. Without a knowledge of the Herodian family, one can hardly have a proper understanding of the times of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Herodian Dynasty<\/p>\n<p>• Herod the Great<\/p>\n<p>• Archelaus<\/p>\n<p>• Antipas<\/p>\n<p>• Philip the Tetrarch<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa II<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHerodianDynasty\">The Herodian Dynasty (67–47 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>The Herodian dynasty became prominent during the confusion that resulted in the decay of the Hasmonean dynasty, the transference of Syria and Palestine to Roman rule, and the civil wars that marked the decay of the nation. Much of what we know about the Herods comes from the historian Josephus’s writings: <em>Antiquities of the Jews<\/em> and <em>The Jewish War.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodtheGreat\">Herod the Great (47–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<h5>As Governor of Galilee (47–37 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Herod the Great became governor of Galilee at 25 years of age. Although he gained the respect of both the Romans and the Galilean Jews for quickly capturing and executing the bandit leader Ezekias, some in Hyrcanus’s court thought that he was becoming too powerful and arranged to have him brought to trial. He was acquitted and released and thereafter fled to Sextus Caesar at Damascus. Sextus Caesar, governor of Syria, appointed Herod governor of Coele-Syria, and thus he became involved with Roman affairs in Syria. He remained in this position under a series of rulers and was successful in collecting taxes and suppressing various revolts. Thus, in 41 <span>BC<\/span> when Antony came to power under Octavius Caesar, after asking the advice of Hyrcanus II, Sextus appointed Herod and Phasael as tetrarchs of Judea.<\/p>\n<h5>As King (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>The reign of Herod is divided by most scholars into three periods: (1) consolidation from 37 to 25 <span>BC<\/span>; (2) prosperity from 25 to 13 <span>BC<\/span>; and (3) domestic troubles from 13 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The period of consolidation extended from his accession as king in 37 <span>BC<\/span> to the death of the sons of Babas, the last male representatives of the Hasmonean family. During this period, he had to contend with many powerful adversaries.<\/p>\n<p>The first adversaries, the people and the Pharisees, objected to his being an Idumean, a half Jew, and a friend of the Romans. Those who opposed him were punished, and those who took his side were rewarded with favors and honors.<\/p>\n<p>The second adversaries were those of the aristocracy who sided with Antigonus. Herod had executed 45 of the wealthiest and had confiscated their properties to replenish his own coffers.<\/p>\n<p>The third group of adversaries was the Hasmonean family. Herod’s chief problem was his mother-in-law, Alexandra. She was upset that he had not appointed another Hasmonean to the high priesthood to replace Hyrcanus, specifically her son Aristobulus. She wrote to Cleopatra, asking her to influence Antony to force Herod to remove the appointed high priest, Ananel, and replace him with Aristobulus. Finally, Herod gave way to the pressure. In the end, after a celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, Herod had Aristobulus drowned, making it look like an accident. Herod put Alexandra in chains and placed her under guard to keep her from causing him more trouble.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s fourth adversary was Cleopatra. When civil war broke out between Antony and Octavius, Herod wanted to help Antony. But Cleopatra persuaded Antony to set Herod in battle against the Arabian king Malchus, who had failed to pay tribute to her. When she saw Herod winning, she ordered her troops to help Malchus, hoping to weaken both parties to the breaking point so that she could absorb them both. After a catastrophic earthquake in his domain in 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Herod defeated the Arabs and returned home. Soon after, on September 2, 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Octavius defeated Antony in the Battle of Actium, resulting in the suicides of Antony and Cleopatra.<\/p>\n<p>The second period of Herod’s reign was one of prosperity (25–14 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a period of splendor and enjoyment interrupted by occasional disturbances. According to Josephus, the most noble of all Herod’s achievements was the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, begun in 20\/19 <span>BC<\/span> (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.8.1). Rabbinic literature claims, “He who has not seen the Temple of Herod has never seen a beautiful building” (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 4a). Prior to this, he had built theaters, amphitheaters, and racecourses for both men and horses. In 24 <span>BC<\/span> Herod built himself a royal palace and built or rebuilt many fortresses and gentile temples, including Strato’s Tower, later renamed Caesarea.<\/p>\n<p>During this time, he became very interested in culture and gathered around him men accomplished in Greek literature and art. Greek rhetoricians were appointed to the highest offices of the state. One of these was Nicolas of Damascus, Herod’s instructor and adviser in philosophy, rhetoric, and history. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married Mariamne, daughter of Simon, a well-known priest in Jerusalem (she will be referred to as Mariamne II).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, Herod’s rule was favorably accepted by the people. They were annoyed, however, by two things. First, he violated Jewish law by his introduction of the quinquennial games in honor of Caesar; and second, he built theaters and racecourses. He demanded a loyalty oath from his subjects, except for a privileged few. Also, he would not allow them to congregate freely for fear of a revolt. Despite these things, he had good control of the people and twice favored them by lowering taxes (in 14 <span>BC<\/span> he reduced taxes by one-fourth).<\/p>\n<p>The third period of Herod’s rule was clearly marked by domestic troubles (13–4 <span>BC<\/span>). By now he had married ten wives. His first wife, Doris, had only one son, Antipater. He repudiated Doris and Antipater when he married Mariamne I, allowing them to visit Jerusalem only during the festivals. He married Mariamne I in 37 <span>BC<\/span>. She was the granddaughter of Hyrcanus and had five children, two daughters and three sons. The youngest son died while in Rome, and the remaining two sons were to play an important role in this part of Herod’s reign. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married his third wife, Mariamne II, to whom one child was born, Herod (Philip). Malthace, his fourth wife, was a Samaritan and mother of two sons, Archelaus and Antipas. His fifth wife, Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was the mother of Philip the tetrarch. Of the remaining five wives, only Pallas, Phaedra, and Elpsis are known by name, and none played a significant part in the events of this period.<\/p>\n<p>Alexander and Aristobulus, the sons of Mariamne I, were his favorites. Immediately following their own marriages, troubles began within the Herodian household. Salome, Herod’s sister and mother of Berenice (wife of Aristobulus), hated these two sons, mainly because she wanted the position and favor they enjoyed for her own son. Herod decided to recall his exiled son Antipater to show Alexander and Aristobulus there was another heir to the throne. Antipater took full advantage of the situation and used every conceivable means to acquire the coveted throne. Finally, a man of bad character, Eurycles from Lacedaemon, took it upon himself to inflame the father against his two sons and vice versa. Soon other mischief makers joined Eurycles, and Herod’s patience became exhausted. He put Alexander and Aristobulus in prison and named Antipater heir.<\/p>\n<p>In his impatience to gain the throne, Antipater attempted to poison Herod. This plot failed when Pheroras, Herod’s brother, drank the poison by mistake. Herod put Antipater in prison and reported the matter to the emperor (c. 5 <span>BC<\/span>). At this time Herod became very ill with an incurable disease. He drew up a new will that bypassed his older sons, Archelaus and Philip, because Antipater had poisoned his mind against them also. He chose his youngest son, Antipas, as his sole successor.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this time that the wise men arrived in Judea, searching for the newborn king of the Jews. Herod instructed them to report to him the whereabouts of this child as soon as they found him. Being warned in a dream, they did not do so, but rather returned to their homes by another route. God warned Joseph (husband of the mother of Jesus) to flee to Egypt because of Herod’s intention to kill Jesus. Joseph took his family and left Bethlehem. Shortly after, Herod killed all the male children in Bethlehem who were two years old and under.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s disease grew increasingly worse. Permission came from Rome to execute Antipater, which he promptly did. He again altered his will, making Archelaus king of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; Antipas tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip tetrarch of territories east of Galilee. On the fifth day after Antipater’s execution, Herod died at Jericho in the spring of 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The people acclaimed Archelaus as their king.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Archelaus\">Archelaus (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6)<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace (a Samaritan) and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. Archelaus was faced with a multitude of problems. He had killed 3,000 people in putting down a revolution led by people avenging the blood of those killed by his father, Herod. Thus his rule got off to a bad start. At Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, another revolt broke out, which lasted about two and a half months and during which the temple porticoes were burned and the treasury was pillaged by the Romans. This unrest spread to the countryside of Judea and to Galilee and Perea.<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus treated both the Jews and the Samaritans brutally (<em>War<\/em> 2.7.3), a fact borne out by the Gospels. When Joseph returned from his flight to Egypt and learned that Archelaus was ruling Judea, he was afraid to go there and was warned against it by God; he took the infant Jesus to Galilee instead (Mt 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus’s tyranny finally caused the Jews and Samaritans to send a delegation to Rome and complain formally to Augustus. The fact that such bitter enemies as the Jews and Samaritans could cooperate in this matter indicates the serious nature of the complaint. Antipas and Philip also went to Rome to complain about him. Presumably they resented his neglect as their Roman representative for Palestine. Thus in <span>AD<\/span> 6 Archelaus was deposed and exiled to Vienna in Gaul (modern Vienne on the Rhône, south of Lyons). Antipas and Philip were allowed to continue their respective rules, and Archelaus’s territories were reduced to a province ruled by prefects or procurators.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antipas\">Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39)<\/p>\n<p>Antipas was the younger brother of Archelaus, born around 20 <span>BC<\/span>. Of all the Herodians, he is mentioned most in the NT because he ruled over Galilee and Perea, where both Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Antipas’s domain was in turmoil caused by the rebellion begun at Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. He immediately set out to restore order and rebuild what had been destroyed. Following the example of his father, Herod the Great, Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris was his first project; it was the largest city in Galilee and his capital city until he built Tiberias. Since Nazareth was only four miles (6.4 kilometers) south-southeast of Sepphoris, it is quite possible that Joseph, Mary’s husband, was employed as a carpenter (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3) to help rebuild that city.<\/p>\n<p>Of the 12 cities built by the Herodian family, Tiberias is the most important. It was the first city in Jewish history to be founded with the municipal framework of a Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">polis<\/span><em>.<\/em> It was built in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius. Due to the fact that a cemetery was destroyed in the process of building, Tiberias was considered unclean by the Jews. Antipas offered free houses, land and tax exemptions for the first few years to anyone who would move into the city. He completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian world the incident for which Antipas is most remembered is his beheading of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2.116-119). There was a tangle of family events leading up to the death of John the Baptist. Antipas had married the daughter of Aretas IV (the daughter’s name is unknown). Aretas IV was the Nabatean king, and Augustus may have encouraged this marriage since he favored intermarriages between various rulers to promote peace in his empire.<\/p>\n<p>Around <span>AD<\/span> 29 Antipas took a trip to Rome, and on the way he paid a visit to his half brother Herod Philip, who must have lived in a coastal city in Palestine. Antipas fell in love with Herodias, Philip’s wife, who was also Antipas’s niece. The idea of becoming the wife of a tetrarch appealed to her, and she agreed to marry him when he returned from Rome if he would oust Aretas’s daughter. Antipas agreed to the plan, and when Aretas’s daughter heard of it, she fled to her father. This was a breach of political alliance as well as a personal insult, which led to retaliation by Aretas.<\/p>\n<p>The marriage of Antipas and Herodias was in violation of the Mosaic law that forbade marriage to a brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21) except in order to raise children for a deceased childless brother by a levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; Mk 12:19). In this case, Philip not only had a child, Salome, but he was still alive. This is the situation that John the Baptist spoke so boldly against, and Antipas threw him in prison. Herodias’s hatred of John the Baptist was too great merely to settle for his incarceration. At an appropriate time, possibly Antipas’s birthday, she planned a banquet at Machaerus in Perea. Her daughter, Salome, danced for the king, and in an impulsive moment Antipas promised her under oath that he would give her anything, up to half of his kingdom. Following her mother’s advice, she asked for John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Immediately Antipas was sorry for his rash promise, but in order to save face in the presence of his underlords, he granted the request. Thus, John’s ministry ended around <span>AD<\/span> 31 or 32.<\/p>\n<p>There are three specific times when Antipas and Jesus are mentioned together in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Early in Jesus’ ministry Antipas heard of him and commented, perhaps with irony, that Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected (Mt 14:1-2; Mk 6:14-16; Lk 9:7-9). It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s, but he was reluctant to use force to bring about the meeting for fear of once more arousing the people against him. Eventually, Jesus withdrew from Antipas’s territories without the two meeting.<\/p>\n<p>Later, as Jesus became more popular, Antipas saw a potential threat to his own power and threatened to kill Jesus. Thus it was that on Jesus’ final trip to Jerusalem he was warned by some of the Pharisees that he should leave Antipas’s territories for his own safety (Lk 13:31-33). Jesus sent as answer to “that fox” that he would continue his ministry of healing and casting out demons for a little longer, and when he had finished, he would then go to Jerusalem to die. The lion and fox were often contrasted in ancient literature. The Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ, was not going to be coerced by the crafty coward, Antipas.<\/p>\n<p>The final encounter between the two occurred when Jesus was tried by Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 33 (Lk 23:6-12). Since this event is mentioned only by Luke, some scholars consider it legendary. It must be remembered, however, that Luke’s addressee was Theophilus, probably a Roman officer, who would be especially interested in the reconciliation between Pilate and Antipas mentioned in this passage.<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke’s account, when Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, he sent him to Antipas (who was celebrating the Passover in Jerusalem). Pilate thus freed himself from an awkward situation. A more subtle reason may have been to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Lk 13:1), and because Pilate brought votive shields into Jerusalem, arousing the anger of the Jews (Philo’s <em>Legatio ad Gaium<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, the ruler only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate. The main political accomplishment of the incident was Antipas and Pilate’s reconciliation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhiliptheTetrarch\">Philip the Tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34)<\/p>\n<p>Philip the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. When Herod’s will was resolved, Philip was made tetrarch over Gaulanitis, Auranitis, Batanea, Trachonitis, and Iturea, all in the northern part of Herod the Great’s domain (Lk 3:1). His subjects were mainly Syrian and Greek. Thus he was the first and only Herodian to have his image on his coins.<\/p>\n<p>He built two cities. First, he rebuilt and enlarged Paneas and renamed it Caesarea Philippi. Here Peter made his confession of faith to Jesus and was given the revelation of the church (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30). Next, he rebuilt and enlarged Bethsaida and renamed it Julias. Here Jesus healed the blind man (Mk 8:22-26), and in a nearby desert place he fed the 5,000 (Lk 9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>Philip was not as politically ambitious as his brothers. His rule was marked by tranquility and the loyalty of his subjects. When Philip died in <span>AD<\/span> 34, Tiberius annexed his territories to Syria. After Caligula became emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 37, he gave the territories to Agrippa I, brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaI\">Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44)<\/p>\n\n<p>Agrippa I was the son of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great and Mariamne I) and Berenice. He was born in 10 <span>BC<\/span> and was the brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I might be considered the black sheep of the Herodian family. While at school in Rome, he lived a wanton life, incurring many debts. In Rome he became a friend of Gaius Caligula and at one point stated that he wished Caligula were king rather than Tiberius. This was overheard and reported to Tiberius, who imprisoned him. He remained in prison until Tiberius’s death six months later.<\/p>\n<p>Upon Caligula’s accession to the throne, he released Agrippa and gave him Philip the tetrarch’s territories and the northern part of Lysanias’s territory as well as the title of king. The title of king aroused the jealousy of his sister Herodias, and that eventually led to her husband, Antipas’s, downfall. At that time (<span>AD<\/span> 39) Agrippa acquired all of Antipas’s territories and property.<\/p>\n<p>When Caligula died in <span>AD<\/span> 41, Agrippa curried the favor of the new emperor Claudius, whereupon Claudius added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s territory. This territory was once ruled by Agrippa’s grandfather, Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I is mentioned in the NT for his persecution of the early church in order to gain favor with the Jews (Acts 12:1-19). He killed James, the son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Peter. When Peter was released by an angel, Agrippa put the sentries to death.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 in Caesarea. Accounts of this incident are recorded both by Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 19.9.1.274–275; <em>War<\/em> 2.11.5.214–215) and the Scriptures. The incident occurred at Caesarea; he was wearing a sparkling silver robe, and when the people flattered him by calling him a god, he was suddenly struck with a mortal illness and died a horrible death. He was survived by his daughters, Bernice, Mariamne, and Drusilla, and by a son, Agrippa, who was 17 at the time. Because of Agrippa II’s youth, his father’s territories were temporarily made a province.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaII\">Agrippa II (<span>AD<\/span> 50–100)<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was the son of Agrippa I and Cypros. In <span>AD<\/span> 50, six years after his father’s death, Claudius made him king of Chalcis.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was in control of the temple treasury and the vestments of the high priest and thus could appoint the high priest. The Romans consulted him on religious matters, which is probably why Festus asked him to hear the apostle Paul at Caesarea (<span>AD<\/span> 59), where he was accompanied by his sister Bernice (Acts 25–26).<\/p>\n<p>In May <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Palestinian revolution began (<em>War<\/em> 2.14.4.284). When Agrippa’s attempt to quell the revolt failed, he became a staunch ally of the Romans throughout the entire war (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). During this time, Nero committed suicide, the new emperor Galba was murdered, and Vespasian became the emperor. After pledging his allegiance to the new emperor, Agrippa remained with Titus, Vespasian’s son, who was in charge of the war (Tacitus’s <em>History<\/em> 5.81). After the fall of Jerusalem (August 6, <span>AD<\/span> 70), Agrippa was probably present to celebrate the destruction of his own people.<\/p>\n<p>Following this, Vespasian added new territories to Agrippa’s kingdom, though just which ones is not known. In <span>AD<\/span> 79 Vespasian died and Titus became emperor. Little is known of Agrippa’s rule after this, except that he wrote to the historian Josephus praising him for <em>The Jewish War,<\/em> and he purchased a copy of it (Josephus’s <em>Life<\/em> 65.361–367; <em>Apion<\/em> 1.9.47–52).<\/p>\n<p>Although the Talmud implies that Agrippa II had two wives (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Sukkah<\/em> 27a), Josephus gives no indication that he had any wives or children. Rather, he was known for his incestuous relationship with his sister Bernice. He died around <span>AD<\/span> 100. His death marked the end of the Herodian dynasty.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herodians; Judaism.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY*<\/h3>\n<p>Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to Rome to be tried by Caesar. Without a knowledge of the Herodian family, one can hardly have a proper understanding of the times of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Herodian Dynasty<\/p>\n<p>• Herod the Great<\/p>\n<p>• Archelaus<\/p>\n<p>• Antipas<\/p>\n<p>• Philip the Tetrarch<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Agrippa II<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheHerodianDynasty\">The Herodian Dynasty (67–47 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<p>The Herodian dynasty became prominent during the confusion that resulted in the decay of the Hasmonean dynasty, the transference of Syria and Palestine to Roman rule, and the civil wars that marked the decay of the nation. Much of what we know about the Herods comes from the historian Josephus’s writings: <em>Antiquities of the Jews<\/em> and <em>The Jewish War.<\/em><\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HerodtheGreat\">Herod the Great (47–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/p>\n<h5>As Governor of Galilee (47–37 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>Herod the Great became governor of Galilee at 25 years of age. Although he gained the respect of both the Romans and the Galilean Jews for quickly capturing and executing the bandit leader Ezekias, some in Hyrcanus’s court thought that he was becoming too powerful and arranged to have him brought to trial. He was acquitted and released and thereafter fled to Sextus Caesar at Damascus. Sextus Caesar, governor of Syria, appointed Herod governor of Coele-Syria, and thus he became involved with Roman affairs in Syria. He remained in this position under a series of rulers and was successful in collecting taxes and suppressing various revolts. Thus, in 41 <span>BC<\/span> when Antony came to power under Octavius Caesar, after asking the advice of Hyrcanus II, Sextus appointed Herod and Phasael as tetrarchs of Judea.<\/p>\n<h5>As King (37–4 <span>BC<\/span>)<\/h5>\n<p>The reign of Herod is divided by most scholars into three periods: (1) consolidation from 37 to 25 <span>BC<\/span>; (2) prosperity from 25 to 13 <span>BC<\/span>; and (3) domestic troubles from 13 to 4 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>The period of consolidation extended from his accession as king in 37 <span>BC<\/span> to the death of the sons of Babas, the last male representatives of the Hasmonean family. During this period, he had to contend with many powerful adversaries.<\/p>\n<p>The first adversaries, the people and the Pharisees, objected to his being an Idumean, a half Jew, and a friend of the Romans. Those who opposed him were punished, and those who took his side were rewarded with favors and honors.<\/p>\n<p>The second adversaries were those of the aristocracy who sided with Antigonus. Herod had executed 45 of the wealthiest and had confiscated their properties to replenish his own coffers.<\/p>\n<p>The third group of adversaries was the Hasmonean family. Herod’s chief problem was his mother-in-law, Alexandra. She was upset that he had not appointed another Hasmonean to the high priesthood to replace Hyrcanus, specifically her son Aristobulus. She wrote to Cleopatra, asking her to influence Antony to force Herod to remove the appointed high priest, Ananel, and replace him with Aristobulus. Finally, Herod gave way to the pressure. In the end, after a celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, Herod had Aristobulus drowned, making it look like an accident. Herod put Alexandra in chains and placed her under guard to keep her from causing him more trouble.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s fourth adversary was Cleopatra. When civil war broke out between Antony and Octavius, Herod wanted to help Antony. But Cleopatra persuaded Antony to set Herod in battle against the Arabian king Malchus, who had failed to pay tribute to her. When she saw Herod winning, she ordered her troops to help Malchus, hoping to weaken both parties to the breaking point so that she could absorb them both. After a catastrophic earthquake in his domain in 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Herod defeated the Arabs and returned home. Soon after, on September 2, 31 <span>BC<\/span>, Octavius defeated Antony in the Battle of Actium, resulting in the suicides of Antony and Cleopatra.<\/p>\n<p>The second period of Herod’s reign was one of prosperity (25–14 <span>BC<\/span>). It was a period of splendor and enjoyment interrupted by occasional disturbances. According to Josephus, the most noble of all Herod’s achievements was the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, begun in 20\/19 <span>BC<\/span> (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 15.8.1). Rabbinic literature claims, “He who has not seen the Temple of Herod has never seen a beautiful building” (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Baba Bathra<\/em> 4a). Prior to this, he had built theaters, amphitheaters, and racecourses for both men and horses. In 24 <span>BC<\/span> Herod built himself a royal palace and built or rebuilt many fortresses and gentile temples, including Strato’s Tower, later renamed Caesarea.<\/p>\n<p>During this time, he became very interested in culture and gathered around him men accomplished in Greek literature and art. Greek rhetoricians were appointed to the highest offices of the state. One of these was Nicolas of Damascus, Herod’s instructor and adviser in philosophy, rhetoric, and history. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married Mariamne, daughter of Simon, a well-known priest in Jerusalem (she will be referred to as Mariamne II).<\/p>\n<p>During this period, Herod’s rule was favorably accepted by the people. They were annoyed, however, by two things. First, he violated Jewish law by his introduction of the quinquennial games in honor of Caesar; and second, he built theaters and racecourses. He demanded a loyalty oath from his subjects, except for a privileged few. Also, he would not allow them to congregate freely for fear of a revolt. Despite these things, he had good control of the people and twice favored them by lowering taxes (in 14 <span>BC<\/span> he reduced taxes by one-fourth).<\/p>\n<p>The third period of Herod’s rule was clearly marked by domestic troubles (13–4 <span>BC<\/span>). By now he had married ten wives. His first wife, Doris, had only one son, Antipater. He repudiated Doris and Antipater when he married Mariamne I, allowing them to visit Jerusalem only during the festivals. He married Mariamne I in 37 <span>BC<\/span>. She was the granddaughter of Hyrcanus and had five children, two daughters and three sons. The youngest son died while in Rome, and the remaining two sons were to play an important role in this part of Herod’s reign. In late 24 <span>BC<\/span> he married his third wife, Mariamne II, to whom one child was born, Herod (Philip). Malthace, his fourth wife, was a Samaritan and mother of two sons, Archelaus and Antipas. His fifth wife, Cleopatra of Jerusalem, was the mother of Philip the tetrarch. Of the remaining five wives, only Pallas, Phaedra, and Elpsis are known by name, and none played a significant part in the events of this period.<\/p>\n<p>Alexander and Aristobulus, the sons of Mariamne I, were his favorites. Immediately following their own marriages, troubles began within the Herodian household. Salome, Herod’s sister and mother of Berenice (wife of Aristobulus), hated these two sons, mainly because she wanted the position and favor they enjoyed for her own son. Herod decided to recall his exiled son Antipater to show Alexander and Aristobulus there was another heir to the throne. Antipater took full advantage of the situation and used every conceivable means to acquire the coveted throne. Finally, a man of bad character, Eurycles from Lacedaemon, took it upon himself to inflame the father against his two sons and vice versa. Soon other mischief makers joined Eurycles, and Herod’s patience became exhausted. He put Alexander and Aristobulus in prison and named Antipater heir.<\/p>\n<p>In his impatience to gain the throne, Antipater attempted to poison Herod. This plot failed when Pheroras, Herod’s brother, drank the poison by mistake. Herod put Antipater in prison and reported the matter to the emperor (c. 5 <span>BC<\/span>). At this time Herod became very ill with an incurable disease. He drew up a new will that bypassed his older sons, Archelaus and Philip, because Antipater had poisoned his mind against them also. He chose his youngest son, Antipas, as his sole successor.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this time that the wise men arrived in Judea, searching for the newborn king of the Jews. Herod instructed them to report to him the whereabouts of this child as soon as they found him. Being warned in a dream, they did not do so, but rather returned to their homes by another route. God warned Joseph (husband of the mother of Jesus) to flee to Egypt because of Herod’s intention to kill Jesus. Joseph took his family and left Bethlehem. Shortly after, Herod killed all the male children in Bethlehem who were two years old and under.<\/p>\n<p>Herod’s disease grew increasingly worse. Permission came from Rome to execute Antipater, which he promptly did. He again altered his will, making Archelaus king of Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; Antipas tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, and Philip tetrarch of territories east of Galilee. On the fifth day after Antipater’s execution, Herod died at Jericho in the spring of 4 <span>BC<\/span>. The people acclaimed Archelaus as their king.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Archelaus\">Archelaus (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 6)<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus was the son of Herod the Great and Malthace (a Samaritan) and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. Archelaus was faced with a multitude of problems. He had killed 3,000 people in putting down a revolution led by people avenging the blood of those killed by his father, Herod. Thus his rule got off to a bad start. At Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, another revolt broke out, which lasted about two and a half months and during which the temple porticoes were burned and the treasury was pillaged by the Romans. This unrest spread to the countryside of Judea and to Galilee and Perea.<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus treated both the Jews and the Samaritans brutally (<em>War<\/em> 2.7.3), a fact borne out by the Gospels. When Joseph returned from his flight to Egypt and learned that Archelaus was ruling Judea, he was afraid to go there and was warned against it by God; he took the infant Jesus to Galilee instead (Mt 2:22).<\/p>\n<p>Archelaus’s tyranny finally caused the Jews and Samaritans to send a delegation to Rome and complain formally to Augustus. The fact that such bitter enemies as the Jews and Samaritans could cooperate in this matter indicates the serious nature of the complaint. Antipas and Philip also went to Rome to complain about him. Presumably they resented his neglect as their Roman representative for Palestine. Thus in <span>AD<\/span> 6 Archelaus was deposed and exiled to Vienna in Gaul (modern Vienne on the Rhône, south of Lyons). Antipas and Philip were allowed to continue their respective rules, and Archelaus’s territories were reduced to a province ruled by prefects or procurators.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Antipas\">Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39)<\/p>\n<p>Antipas was the younger brother of Archelaus, born around 20 <span>BC<\/span>. Of all the Herodians, he is mentioned most in the NT because he ruled over Galilee and Perea, where both Jesus and John the Baptist concentrated their ministries.<\/p>\n<p>Antipas’s domain was in turmoil caused by the rebellion begun at Pentecost in 4 <span>BC<\/span>. He immediately set out to restore order and rebuild what had been destroyed. Following the example of his father, Herod the Great, Antipas founded cities. Sepphoris was his first project; it was the largest city in Galilee and his capital city until he built Tiberias. Since Nazareth was only four miles (6.4 kilometers) south-southeast of Sepphoris, it is quite possible that Joseph, Mary’s husband, was employed as a carpenter (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3) to help rebuild that city.<\/p>\n<p>Of the 12 cities built by the Herodian family, Tiberias is the most important. It was the first city in Jewish history to be founded with the municipal framework of a Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">polis<\/span><em>.<\/em> It was built in honor of the reigning emperor, Tiberius. Due to the fact that a cemetery was destroyed in the process of building, Tiberias was considered unclean by the Jews. Antipas offered free houses, land and tax exemptions for the first few years to anyone who would move into the city. He completed the city in <span>AD<\/span> 23 and made it his capital.<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian world the incident for which Antipas is most remembered is his beheading of John the Baptist (Mt 14:3-12; Mk 6:17-29; Lk 3:19-20; <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.5.2.116-119). There was a tangle of family events leading up to the death of John the Baptist. Antipas had married the daughter of Aretas IV (the daughter’s name is unknown). Aretas IV was the Nabatean king, and Augustus may have encouraged this marriage since he favored intermarriages between various rulers to promote peace in his empire.<\/p>\n<p>Around <span>AD<\/span> 29 Antipas took a trip to Rome, and on the way he paid a visit to his half brother Herod Philip, who must have lived in a coastal city in Palestine. Antipas fell in love with Herodias, Philip’s wife, who was also Antipas’s niece. The idea of becoming the wife of a tetrarch appealed to her, and she agreed to marry him when he returned from Rome if he would oust Aretas’s daughter. Antipas agreed to the plan, and when Aretas’s daughter heard of it, she fled to her father. This was a breach of political alliance as well as a personal insult, which led to retaliation by Aretas.<\/p>\n<p>The marriage of Antipas and Herodias was in violation of the Mosaic law that forbade marriage to a brother’s wife (Lv 18:16; 20:21) except in order to raise children for a deceased childless brother by a levirate marriage (Dt 25:5; Mk 12:19). In this case, Philip not only had a child, Salome, but he was still alive. This is the situation that John the Baptist spoke so boldly against, and Antipas threw him in prison. Herodias’s hatred of John the Baptist was too great merely to settle for his incarceration. At an appropriate time, possibly Antipas’s birthday, she planned a banquet at Machaerus in Perea. Her daughter, Salome, danced for the king, and in an impulsive moment Antipas promised her under oath that he would give her anything, up to half of his kingdom. Following her mother’s advice, she asked for John the Baptist’s head on a platter. Immediately Antipas was sorry for his rash promise, but in order to save face in the presence of his underlords, he granted the request. Thus, John’s ministry ended around <span>AD<\/span> 31 or 32.<\/p>\n<p>There are three specific times when Antipas and Jesus are mentioned together in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Early in Jesus’ ministry Antipas heard of him and commented, perhaps with irony, that Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected (Mt 14:1-2; Mk 6:14-16; Lk 9:7-9). It was obvious to Antipas that Jesus’ ministry was even more remarkable than John’s, but he was reluctant to use force to bring about the meeting for fear of once more arousing the people against him. Eventually, Jesus withdrew from Antipas’s territories without the two meeting.<\/p>\n<p>Later, as Jesus became more popular, Antipas saw a potential threat to his own power and threatened to kill Jesus. Thus it was that on Jesus’ final trip to Jerusalem he was warned by some of the Pharisees that he should leave Antipas’s territories for his own safety (Lk 13:31-33). Jesus sent as answer to “that fox” that he would continue his ministry of healing and casting out demons for a little longer, and when he had finished, he would then go to Jerusalem to die. The lion and fox were often contrasted in ancient literature. The Lion of Judah, Jesus Christ, was not going to be coerced by the crafty coward, Antipas.<\/p>\n<p>The final encounter between the two occurred when Jesus was tried by Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 33 (Lk 23:6-12). Since this event is mentioned only by Luke, some scholars consider it legendary. It must be remembered, however, that Luke’s addressee was Theophilus, probably a Roman officer, who would be especially interested in the reconciliation between Pilate and Antipas mentioned in this passage.<\/p>\n<p>According to Luke’s account, when Pilate could find no fault in Jesus, he sent him to Antipas (who was celebrating the Passover in Jerusalem). Pilate thus freed himself from an awkward situation. A more subtle reason may have been to reconcile himself to Antipas. Their relationship had been rather strained since the Galilean massacre (Lk 13:1), and because Pilate brought votive shields into Jerusalem, arousing the anger of the Jews (Philo’s <em>Legatio ad Gaium<\/em> 299–304). When Jesus was brought before Antipas, the ruler only mocked him and sent him back to Pilate. The main political accomplishment of the incident was Antipas and Pilate’s reconciliation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PhiliptheTetrarch\">Philip the Tetrarch (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 34)<\/p>\n<p>Philip the tetrarch was the son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra of Jerusalem and was born around 22 <span>BC<\/span>. When Herod’s will was resolved, Philip was made tetrarch over Gaulanitis, Auranitis, Batanea, Trachonitis, and Iturea, all in the northern part of Herod the Great’s domain (Lk 3:1). His subjects were mainly Syrian and Greek. Thus he was the first and only Herodian to have his image on his coins.<\/p>\n<p>He built two cities. First, he rebuilt and enlarged Paneas and renamed it Caesarea Philippi. Here Peter made his confession of faith to Jesus and was given the revelation of the church (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-30). Next, he rebuilt and enlarged Bethsaida and renamed it Julias. Here Jesus healed the blind man (Mk 8:22-26), and in a nearby desert place he fed the 5,000 (Lk 9:10-17).<\/p>\n<p>Philip was not as politically ambitious as his brothers. His rule was marked by tranquility and the loyalty of his subjects. When Philip died in <span>AD<\/span> 34, Tiberius annexed his territories to Syria. After Caligula became emperor in <span>AD<\/span> 37, he gave the territories to Agrippa I, brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaI\">Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44)<\/p>\n\n<p>Agrippa I was the son of Aristobulus (son of Herod the Great and Mariamne I) and Berenice. He was born in 10 <span>BC<\/span> and was the brother of Herodias.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I might be considered the black sheep of the Herodian family. While at school in Rome, he lived a wanton life, incurring many debts. In Rome he became a friend of Gaius Caligula and at one point stated that he wished Caligula were king rather than Tiberius. This was overheard and reported to Tiberius, who imprisoned him. He remained in prison until Tiberius’s death six months later.<\/p>\n<p>Upon Caligula’s accession to the throne, he released Agrippa and gave him Philip the tetrarch’s territories and the northern part of Lysanias’s territory as well as the title of king. The title of king aroused the jealousy of his sister Herodias, and that eventually led to her husband, Antipas’s, downfall. At that time (<span>AD<\/span> 39) Agrippa acquired all of Antipas’s territories and property.<\/p>\n<p>When Caligula died in <span>AD<\/span> 41, Agrippa curried the favor of the new emperor Claudius, whereupon Claudius added Judea and Samaria to Agrippa’s territory. This territory was once ruled by Agrippa’s grandfather, Herod the Great.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa I is mentioned in the NT for his persecution of the early church in order to gain favor with the Jews (Acts 12:1-19). He killed James, the son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Peter. When Peter was released by an angel, Agrippa put the sentries to death.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa died in <span>AD<\/span> 44 in Caesarea. Accounts of this incident are recorded both by Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 19.9.1.274–275; <em>War<\/em> 2.11.5.214–215) and the Scriptures. The incident occurred at Caesarea; he was wearing a sparkling silver robe, and when the people flattered him by calling him a god, he was suddenly struck with a mortal illness and died a horrible death. He was survived by his daughters, Bernice, Mariamne, and Drusilla, and by a son, Agrippa, who was 17 at the time. Because of Agrippa II’s youth, his father’s territories were temporarily made a province.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"AgrippaII\">Agrippa II (<span>AD<\/span> 50–100)<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was the son of Agrippa I and Cypros. In <span>AD<\/span> 50, six years after his father’s death, Claudius made him king of Chalcis.<\/p>\n<p>Agrippa II was in control of the temple treasury and the vestments of the high priest and thus could appoint the high priest. The Romans consulted him on religious matters, which is probably why Festus asked him to hear the apostle Paul at Caesarea (<span>AD<\/span> 59), where he was accompanied by his sister Bernice (Acts 25–26).<\/p>\n<p>In May <span>AD<\/span> 66 the Palestinian revolution began (<em>War<\/em> 2.14.4.284). When Agrippa’s attempt to quell the revolt failed, he became a staunch ally of the Romans throughout the entire war (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70). During this time, Nero committed suicide, the new emperor Galba was murdered, and Vespasian became the emperor. After pledging his allegiance to the new emperor, Agrippa remained with Titus, Vespasian’s son, who was in charge of the war (Tacitus’s <em>History<\/em> 5.81). After the fall of Jerusalem (August 6, <span>AD<\/span> 70), Agrippa was probably present to celebrate the destruction of his own people.<\/p>\n<p>Following this, Vespasian added new territories to Agrippa’s kingdom, though just which ones is not known. In <span>AD<\/span> 79 Vespasian died and Titus became emperor. Little is known of Agrippa’s rule after this, except that he wrote to the historian Josephus praising him for <em>The Jewish War,<\/em> and he purchased a copy of it (Josephus’s <em>Life<\/em> 65.361–367; <em>Apion<\/em> 1.9.47–52).<\/p>\n<p>Although the Talmud implies that Agrippa II had two wives (Babylonian Talmud: <em>Sukkah<\/em> 27a), Josephus gives no indication that he had any wives or children. Rather, he was known for his incestuous relationship with his sister Bernice. He died around <span>AD<\/span> 100. His death marked the end of the Herodian dynasty.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Herodians; Judaism.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY* Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to...","summary_en":"HEROD, HERODIAN FAMILY* Political rulers during the lifetime of Christ. Christ was born when Herod the Great was ruling. Herod’s son Herod Antipas was the ruler of Galilee and Perea, the territories in which Jesus and John the Baptist carried out most of their ministries. It was this ruler who beheaded John the Baptist and tried Christ just before his death. Herod Agrippa I is the persecutor of the church in Acts 12, and Herod Agrippa II heard Paul’s testimony (Acts 26) just before he went to...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19505,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jesus Christ","title_en":"Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church.<\/p>\n<p>In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritual understanding of Jesus. These different aims caused the four Evangelists to select and arrange the events of Jesus’ life differently, resulting in a fourfold portrait of the same man. It was undoubtedly for this reason that the Christian church preserved four Gospels instead of only one.<\/p>\n<p>The following sections present the main events in what may be regarded as the chief stages of the life of Jesus. These stages show a definite progression from Christ’s incarnation to his cross. The amount of space devoted to each stage in each of the Gospels is dictated by theological rather than biographical interest. The whole presentation of Christ’s life centers on the cross and the subsequent triumphant resurrection and is more an account of God’s message to humanity than a plain historic account of the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>• The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>• Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>• The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>• The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n<p>• On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>• The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>• The Trial<\/p>\n<p>• The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheIncarnation\">The Incarnation<\/p>\n<p>The major event of this initial stage was the Incarnation. Only Matthew and Luke give accounts of Jesus’ birth. John goes back and reflects on what preceded the birth.<\/p>\n<p>It may seem strange that John began his Gospel with a reference to the Word (Jn 1:1), but it is in this way that he delivers to the reader an exalted view of Jesus. John saw Jesus as existing even before the creation of the world (v 2). In fact, he saw him as having a part in the act of creation (v 3). Therefore, when Jesus was born, it was both an act of humiliation and an act of illumination. The light shone, but the world preferred to remain in darkness (vv 4-5, 10). Therefore, anyone coming to John’s records of the life of Jesus would know at once, before even being introduced to the man named Jesus, that here was the record of no ordinary man. The account of his life and teachings that followed could not be properly understood except against this background of his preexistence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBirthofJesus\">The Birth of Jesus<\/p>\n<p>John simply wrote that the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. Matthew and Luke fill in some of the details of how this happened. There is little in common between the two accounts. Each approaches the subject from a different point of view, but the supernatural is evident in both. The coming of Jesus is announced beforehand, through dreams to Joseph in Matthew’s account (Mt 1:20-21) and through an angel to Mary in Luke’s account (Lk 1:26-33). Matthew leaves his readers in no doubt that the one to be born had a mission to accomplish—to save people from their sins (Mt 1:21). Luke sets his story of Jesus’ coming in an atmosphere of great rejoicing. This is seen in the inclusion of some exquisite songs, which have formed part of the church’s worship ever since (Lk 1:46-55, 68-79). The homage of the wise men in Matthew 2:1-12 is significant because it sets the scene for a universalistic emphasis that links the beginning of the Gospel to its ending (cf. Mt 28:19-20). A similar emphasis is introduced in the angel’s announcement to the shepherds in Luke 2:14 and in Simeon’s song (Lk 2:32), where he predicts that Jesus would be a light for Gentiles as well as a glory for Israel. The flight into Egypt for safety (Mt 2:13-15) shows the contribution of a gentile nation in providing protection for a Jewish child.<\/p>\n<p>One feature of the birth stories in Matthew and Luke is that they are both linked to genealogies. It is difficult to harmonize these genealogies since they appear to be drawn from different sources, but the purpose in both cases is to show that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David. The latter fact gave rise to Jesus’ title Son of David.<\/p>\n<p>Luke was the only Gospel writer who attempted to link the coming of Jesus with events in secular history. Although problems arise over the dating of the census of Quirinius (Lk 2:1-2), the firm setting of the contemporary scene is highly significant because the Christian faith is a historic faith centered on a historic person.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"LifeinNazareth\">Life in Nazareth<\/p>\n<p>The years of Jesus Christ’s human development are given only a few lines in the Gospels. Details are given of only one incident belonging to the period of childhood, the discussion of the 12-year-old Jesus with the Jewish teachers in the temple (Lk 2:41-50). This event is a pointer to one of the most characteristic features of Jesus’ later ministry: his display of irrefutable wisdom in dialogue with his Jewish contemporaries. It also reveals that at an early age Jesus was acutely aware of a divine mission. Nevertheless, Luke notes that in Jesus’ formative years he was obedient to his parents (v 51). It is assumed that during 30 years at Nazareth Jesus learned the carpenter’s trade from Joseph and became the village carpenter after Joseph’s death. However, there is no account of this period in the Gospels. This has led to many fantastic imaginings about Jesus’ childhood. Many of these fables are recorded in apocryphal gospels, but Luke’s account is unembellished. Its remarkable reserve is a strong indication of its historical reliability.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PreparatoryEvents\">Preparatory Events<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels refer to a brief preparatory period that immediately preceded the commencement of Christ’s public ministry. This period focused on three important events.<\/p>\n<h5>The Preaching of John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness and caused an immediate stir in Judea, particularly as a result of his call to repentance and to baptism (Mt 3:1-6). John was like one of the OT prophets, but he disclaimed any importance in his own office except as the herald of a greater person to come. His stern appearance and uncompromising moral challenge effectively prepared the way for the public appearance of Jesus (Lk 3:4-6). It is important to note that John the Baptist’s announcement of the imminent coming of the kingdom (Mt 3:2) was the same theme with which Jesus began his own ministry (4:17). This shows that John the Baptist’s work was an integral part of the preparation for the public ministry of Jesus. The same may be said of the rite of baptism, although John recognized that Jesus would add a new dimension in that he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (3:11). As the forerunner of Jesus Christ, John proclaimed that the one to follow would not only be greater than he but would also come with high standards of judgment (v 12). The stage was therefore set in stern terms for the initial public act of Jesus—his willingness to be baptized (Mt 3:13-15; Lk 3:21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Baptism of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. Since Jesus submitted to this, are we to suppose that Jesus himself needed to repent? If this were the case, it would involve the assumption that Jesus had sinned. This is contrary to other evidence in the NT. But if Jesus did not need to repent, what was the point of his requesting baptism at the hands of John? Jesus had come on a mission to others, and it is possible that he deliberately submitted to John’s baptism in order to show that he was prepared to take the place of others. This explanation is in line with Paul’s later understanding of the work of Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). Matthew is the one Evangelist who records John’s hesitation to baptize Jesus (Mt 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most important part of the baptism of Jesus was the heavenly voice, which declared pleasure in the beloved Son (Mt 3:17). This announcement by God was the real starting point of the public ministry of Jesus. It revealed that the ministry was no accident or sudden inspiration on the part of Jesus. He went into his work with the full approval of the Father. A further important feature is the part played by the Holy Spirit in this scene. The dovelike description is full of symbolic meaning (v 16). It was not just an inner experience that Jesus had. The activity of the Spirit in the ministry of Jesus, although not much emphasized in the Gospels, is nevertheless sufficiently evident to be indispensable to a true understanding of Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<h5>The Temptation of Jesus<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus’ baptism showed the nature of his mission. The temptation showed the nature of the environment in which he was to minister (Mt 4:1; Lk 4:1-2). Confrontation with adverse spiritual forces characterized Jesus’ whole ministry. Only Matthew and Luke record details of the temptations to which Jesus was subjected by the devil. All these temptations present shortcuts that, if pursued, would have deflected Jesus from his vocation. The record leaves us in no doubt that Jesus gained the victory. Both Gospels show that he accomplished this by appealing to Scripture. Jesus is also seen in this event as a genuine human who, like all other humans, was subject to temptation. The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews notes that this fact qualified Jesus to act as High Priest and to intercede on behalf of his people (Heb 2:18; 4:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheEarlyMinistryofJesusinJudeaandSamaria\">The Early Ministry of Jesus in Judea and Samaria<\/p>\n<p>Only John’s Gospel tells of the work of Jesus in Judea following his baptism. It first describes his calling of two disciples, John and Andrew (Jn 1:35-39). This event is set against the background of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world (v 29). These first two disciples were soon joined by three others: Peter, Philip, and Nathanael (vv 41-51). These five formed part of the nucleus of Jesus’ followers who came to be known as the Twelve. One feature of John’s account is the early recognition by the disciples of Jesus as Messiah (Jn 1:41) and Son of God (v 49).<\/p>\n<p>Soon after Jesus began his ministry in Jerusalem, John relates an incident at Cana in Galilee in which water was turned into wine (Jn 2:1-10). This event is important in John’s account because it is the first of the signs that he records (v 11). He saw Jesus’ miracles as “signs” of the truth of the gospel rather than as mere wonders.<\/p>\n<p>John sets two incidents at Jerusalem in this initial period. The first is the cleansing of the temple (Jn 2:13-16). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all place this event just before Jesus’ trial, but John places it at this early stage. The moral intention of Jesus’ work is seen in his driving out the money changers who were profiting from worshipers more than was appropriate. This was apparently acceptable to Judaism but was unacceptable to Jesus. The other Evangelists imply that this authoritative act was the event that sparked the final hostility of his opponents. John tells the story for a theological reason; to him, the cleansing of the temple was a parable telling of what Jesus had come to do.<\/p>\n<p>The other incident in Jerusalem is the meeting between Jesus and Nicodemus (Jn 3). Nicodemus was closely associated with Judaism, yet he was also searching for truth. He was unable to understand, however, the spiritual truth about being born again through the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>John’s story then moves from Judea to Samaria and the story of the Samaritan woman at the well (Jn 4:1-42). Jesus used her physical thirst to point to her deeper spiritual thirst. She realized that Jesus had something to offer her that she had not previously known. As a result of this woman’s experience and testimony, many of the Samaritan people came to believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world (v 42). In this case John intends that his readers would appreciate the fuller significance of the words of Jesus by viewing them in the light of the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePeriodoftheGalileanMinistry\">The Period of the Galilean Ministry<\/p>\n\n<p>Almost all the information on this period is found in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke.) It may be conveniently divided into three sections. The first briefly outlines the events leading up to the choosing of the Twelve; the second deals with Jesus’ withdrawal from northern Galilee; and the third deals with his departure for Jerusalem. While the synoptic Gospels concentrate exclusively on the events in Galilee, John’s account indicates that there were some visits by Jesus to Jerusalem during this period. Also, John records another incident at Cana, where the son of a Capernaum official was healed. This is noted as the second of Jesus’ signs (Jn 4:54). It is chiefly important because of the extraordinary faith of the father, who was prepared to take Jesus at his word.<\/p>\n<h5>The Calling of the Disciples<\/h5>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels there is an account of the initial call to four of the disciples to leave their fishing boats and to become fishers of men (Mt 4:18-22; Mk 1:16-20; Lk 5:1-11). They had already met Jesus and must have had some idea what was involved in following him. Jesus did not at this time appoint them to be apostles, but this call was an indispensable step toward the establishment of the Twelve as a group. Setting apart a particular number of disciples formed an important part of the ministry of Jesus. The miraculous catch of fish, which preceded the call of the disciples in Luke’s account, served to highlight the superiority of the spiritual task of catching people rather than fish.<\/p>\n<p>Another significant call came to Levi, otherwise known as Matthew (Mt 9:9; Mk 2:13-14; Lk 5:27-28). As a tax collector, he was of a different type from most of the other disciples. He would certainly have been despised by his Jewish contemporaries because of his profession. But his inclusion in the special circle of Jesus’ disciples shows the broad basis on which these men were chosen. One of the others, Simon the Zealot, may have belonged to a group of revolutionaries who were religious as well as political. Even a man like Judas Iscariot was numbered among the Twelve, and he would later betray Jesus to his enemies for a small sum of money. Jesus accepted them as they were and molded them into men who later came to learn how to be totally dependent on God and the power of his Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Sermon on the Mount<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew presents a substantial sample of Jesus’ teachings commonly called the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:1–7:29). Some of the same material occurs in Luke in a different context and different arrangement. It is possible that Jesus often repeated his teachings on different occasions and with different combinations. Matthew’s record of the Sermon on the Mount presents an impressive body of teaching, mainly of an ethical character. In it Jesus upholds the Mosaic law and at the same time goes beyond it. The beginning of this sermon has been called the Beatitudes (5:3-12). It commends moral and spiritual values. The teachings recorded in this section were radical, but not in a political sense. The Sermon on the Mount may be taken as a fair sample of the kind of discourses that must have abounded in the ministry of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus as Healer<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout the Gospels there are records of miracles involving Jesus healing people. There are more of these miracles than any other type. In a section in Matthew devoted to a sequence of healings (Mt 8:1–9:34), a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law, a demoniac, a paralytic, a woman with a hemorrhage, blind men, and a man who was mute—all were healed. In addition, Jairus’s daughter was raised from the dead. This concentration of healings focuses on Jesus as a miracle worker, but throughout the Gospels there is no suggestion that Jesus healed by magical means. In some cases an individual’s faith was acknowledged (8:10; 9:22). In at least one incident, the healing was accompanied by an announcement of the forgiveness of the sins of the one healed (Mt 9:2; Mk 2:5). This shows that Jesus considered spiritual needs to be of greater consequence than the physical problems.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the widespread belief in the powerful influence of evil spirits over human lives, it is of great significance that Jesus is seen exercising his power of exorcism over demons. Jesus’ ministry was set in an atmosphere of spiritual conflict, so the confrontations between the forces of darkness and the Light of the World were to be expected. Those who explain away these cases of demon-possession in psychiatric terms miss this key feature of Jesus’ ministry. Each time he exorcised a demon, he was demonstrating victory, which reached its most dramatic expression in his victory over death at his resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the healing miracles in this early section, one nature miracle is recorded, that of the stilling of the storm (Mt 8:23-27; Mk 4:35-41; Lk 8:22-25). This miracle focused both on the lack of faith in the disciples and the mysterious power of the presence of Jesus.<\/p>\n<h5>The Reaction to Jesus by His Contemporaries<\/h5>\n<p>In the early stages of his ministry, Jesus was very popular with the ordinary people. There are several notices to this effect (Mt 4:23-25; Mk 3:7-8). This popularity showed no appreciation of the spiritual purpose of Jesus’ mission (Lk 13:17). Nevertheless, it stands in stark contrast to the nit-picking opposition of the religious leaders, who even plotted to kill Jesus in the early period of his ministry (Mk 3:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and the religious leaders often clashed over the observance of the Sabbath (Mt 12:1-14; Lk 13:10-17; Jn 5:9-18). Jesus adopted a more liberal view than the rigid and often illogical interpretation of some of his religious contemporaries—as in the instances when he was criticized for healing on the Sabbath even though the Jewish law allowed the rescuing of trapped animals on the Sabbath (Mt 12:11; Lk 13:15). To the Pharisaic mind, Jesus was a lawbreaker. The Pharisees feared that it would undermine their authority if his teaching were permitted to permeate popular opinion.<\/p>\n<h5>Preparing the Twelve<\/h5>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels supply lists of the names of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:2-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16). Both Matthew and Mark name them in the context of their exercising authority over evil spirits, thereby showing that these men were being called to enter the same spiritual conflict as Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels also give details of the instructions Jesus gave to these disciples before sending them to minister in Israel (Mt 10:5-42; Mk 6:7-13; Lk 9:1-6). Matthew included material in his discourse that appears in a different context in Mark and Luke, but the discourse still shows the concern of Jesus to prepare his disciples for their future work. They were to proclaim the kingdom as he had done, but they were not to suppose that all would respond to it. They were warned about coming hostility and even persecution. It is important to note that Jesus warned his disciples against encumbering themselves with material possessions. Although the instructions given related immediately to a ministry tour, he was laying the foundation for the future work of the church.<\/p>\n<h5>The Relationship between Jesus and John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>For a while there were parallel preaching and parallel baptisms by John the Baptist with his followers and Jesus with his disciples (Jn 4:1-2). After John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod because of his uncompromising condemnation of Herod’s marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife (Mt 14:3-4), John began to have doubts about Jesus (Mt 11:1-19; Lk 7:18-35). He may have been expecting Jesus, if he really was the Messiah, to come to his rescue. When John sent his disciples to Jesus to express his doubts, Jesus took the opportunity to tell the crowds of the greatness of John the Baptist. He said there was none born of women who was greater than John.<\/p>\n<h5>Various Controversies<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus did not hesitate to confront his contemporaries on issues that involved moral or religious questions. The controversy recorded in John’s Gospel concerning the keeping of the Sabbath that arose when a lame man was healed on that day (Jn 5:1-18) shows once again that ritual observance of the Sabbath was regarded as of greater importance than a compassionate concern for the physical welfare of the lame man. This was typical of the Jewish approach and led at once to a persecuting attitude toward Jesus, particularly because he claimed to be doing the work of God.<\/p>\n<p>A similar conflict arose after Jesus’ disciples had plucked grain in the fields on the Sabbath day (Mt 12:1-8). The Pharisees assumed that this act constituted work and saw it as a sufficient reason to plot how to destroy Jesus. After this event, he healed a paralytic on the same Sabbath day (vv 9-14). The Jewish leaders clearly regarded him as a direct threat to their position among the people.<\/p>\n<p>The rising opposition did not deter Jesus from further healings (Mt 12:15-32), which Matthew depicts as the fulfillment of Scripture. But when Jesus healed a blind and mute demoniac, the Pharisees charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons. Jesus told them that to blaspheme the Holy Spirit was an unforgivable sin. This incident not only brings out the perversity of the religious leaders but also shows that the ministry of Jesus was under the direct control of the Spirit. Other notable miracles were the healing of the centurion’s servant, as recorded by Luke (Lk 7:1-10), and the raising from the dead of the widow’s son at Nain (vv 11-17). The former of these is notable because of the remarkable faith of a Gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Another example of the Pharisees’ criticism was when Jesus attended a meal in Simon the Pharisee’s house (Lk 7:36-50). His host had not provided for the usual courtesies toward guests and yet was critical of Jesus for allowing an immoral woman to wash his feet with tears, dry them with her hair, and anoint them with ointment. There is no doubt that most of Simon’s colleagues would have shared his reaction, but Jesus did not stop the woman because he knew that the motive impelling her to do it was love. He told Simon a parable to press home his point.<\/p>\n<p>John records two visits by Jesus to Jerusalem. These are difficult to date, but they probably occurred during the early period of the ministry. He attended the Feast of Tabernacles (Jn 7:2) and the Feast of Dedication (10:22). At these times Jesus taught in the temple area and entered into dialogue with the religious leaders. The chief priests became alarmed at his presence and sent officers to arrest him (7:32). They were unable to do so; instead, they themselves were captivated by his teachings. More discussions with the Jewish leaders followed. They charged Jesus with being demon-possessed (8:48). Both in this case and in the event of the healing of the blind man (ch 9), the hostility of the Jewish leaders to Jesus surfaces. When Jesus spoke of himself as the Shepherd, his teaching again raised the anger of his Jewish hearers, who took up stones to kill him (10:31).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching in Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew’s Gospel gives a sample of a continuous discourse by Jesus (Mt 5:1–7:29), but Jesus more often spoke in parables. Matthew collected into a group some of the parables that concern the theme of the kingdom (ch 13). Luke tends to preserve parables of a different kind that are not specially linked to the kingdom. Mark has the least number of parables among the synoptic Gospels, but his writing shows little interest in Jesus as a teacher. John does not relate any parables, although he does preserve two allegories—the Sheepfold and the Vine—which could be regarded as extended parables. The parable was a form of teaching particularly characteristic of Jesus. In addition, Jesus interspersed even his discourses with metaphors akin to the parabolic form. The parable was valuable because it could stimulate thought and challenge the hearer. This is because the form of the parable is easy to retain in the mind. Jesus did not speak in parables in order to obscure his meaning. This would be contrary to all that he aimed to do through his work and teaching.<\/p>\n<h5>Significant Events in Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>In Nazareth there was a striking instance of the unwillingness to respond to the ministry of Jesus. The people of his hometown proved so hostile that he could perform very few miracles there (Mt 13:53-58; Mk 6:1-6). This incident is important because it shows that faith was especially necessary for people to receive his healing miracles.<\/p>\n<p>The one miracle performed by Jesus that all four Evangelists describe is the feeding of the 5,000 (Mt 14:13-21; Mk 6:30-44; Lk 9:10-17; Jn 6:1-15). This occasion shows the great popularity of Jesus at this stage of his ministry. It also reveals that he was not unmindful of the physical needs of people. After this miracle, some wanted to make Jesus king. This casts considerable light on their real motives. They were more concerned with material and political expediency than with spiritual truth. This is why Jesus immediately withdrew from them. When the people found him the next day, he proceeded to instruct them about the spiritual bread that comes from heaven (Jn 6:25-40).<\/p>\n<p>At this point in John’s Gospel, Jesus is often seen in dialogue with his opponents. This style of teaching is different from the synoptic parables but familiar in Jewish-style debate. Many of the people found the spiritual themes in the teaching of Jesus too difficult to accept and consequently ceased to be his disciples (Jn 6:51-52, 60, 66). This incident demonstrates the unique challenge presented by Jesus and his teaching. Another miracle closely linked with this is when Jesus walked on the water, demonstrating his power in the natural world. Many have sought to rationalize the event by supposing that Jesus was really walking on the shore, and that the disciples did not realize this in the haze. But this miracle is no more extraordinary than the massive multiplication of loaves and fishes, nor is it inconceivable if the miracle worker was all that he claimed to be.<\/p>\n<h5>Leaving Northern Galilee<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus spent a brief time in the region of Tyre and Sidon, where he performed further healings and made it clear that his main mission was to the house of Israel (Mt 15:21-28). He then moved on to Caesarea Philippi; this was the turning point of his ministry (Mt 16:13-20; Mk 8:27-38; Lk 9:18-27). It was there that Jesus asked his disciples: “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” This caused Peter to confess: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” This impressive confession led Jesus to promise that he would build his church on “this rock.” There has been much discussion about the meaning of this saying. It is open to some doubt whether Jesus intended to build his church on Peter, on his confession, or on Peter making the confession. Historically, Peter was the instrument God used for the entrance into the church of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). There is no doubt about Jesus’ intention to found a church, since the word occurs again in Matthew 18:17. Despite the glorious revelation of Jesus on this occasion, he took it as an opportunity to begin to inform his disciples of his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>This revelation of Jesus was considerably reinforced by the event known as the Transfiguration, when Jesus was transformed in the presence of three of his disciples (Mt 17:1-8). It was natural for them to want to keep this glorious vision of Jesus for themselves, but the vision vanished as rapidly as it came. Its purpose was evidently to show the three leading disciples something of the nature of Jesus, which was obscured by his normal human form. A further feature of the vision was the appearance with Jesus of Moses and Elijah, representatives of the Law and the Prophets.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration, Jesus made two predictions concerning his approaching death. These announcements were a total perplexity to the disciples. In Matthew 16, when Jesus mentioned his death, Peter attempted to rebuke Jesus and was rebuked by Jesus in kind. When Jesus mentioned his death again in chapter 17, Matthew noted that the disciples were greatly distressed (Mt 17:23), while Mark and Luke mentioned the disciples’ lack of understanding (Mk 9:32; Lk 9:45). Jesus was approaching the cross with no support from those closest to him. It is not surprising that when the hour arrived they all forsook him.<\/p>\n<p>After the Transfiguration revealed that Jesus was greater than Moses and Elijah and in fact was the beloved Son of God, he was asked to pay the temple tax (Mt 17:24-27). This incident illustrates the attitude of Jesus toward the authorities and practical responsibilities. He paid the tax, although he did not acknowledge any obligation to do so. The method of payment was extraordinary, for it involved the miracle of the coin in the fish. But the greater importance of the incident is the light it throws on Jesus’ independence from the Jewish law.<\/p>\n<p>Luke devotes more than half his Gospel to the period that begins with Jesus leaving Galilee and ends with his death and resurrection in Jerusalem. In this section of his Gospel, Luke introduces a great deal of material that does not occur elsewhere. We can do no more than summarize some of the more striking items that throw light on the life of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the mission of the Twelve, Luke records the mission of the Seventy (or Seventy-two—see Lk 10:17-20). Special parables are recorded by Luke in this section—the Good Samaritan (vv 29-37), the lost sheep (15:3-7), the lost coin (vv 8-10), and the prodigal son (vv 11-32). As Jesus moved toward Jerusalem, he was concerned with developing the spiritual life of his disciples. He was mindful of the fact that he would not be with them long and wished to prepare them for the future. He taught them about prayer (11:1-13), the Father’s care for them (12:13-34), and preparation for the coming of the Son of Man (vv 35-56).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OntheWaytoJerusalem\">On the Way to Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>On the approach to Jerusalem, Jesus visited both Jericho and Bethany. At Jericho he healed Bartimaeus (Lk 18:35-43) and had a fruitful encounter with Zacchaeus, who reformed his ways as a tax collector (19:1-10). Bethany was the home of Mary, Martha, and their brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead (Jn 11). Jesus spent his remaining days in Jerusalem but returned each night to stay at Simon the Leper’s house in Bethany in the presence of those who loved him (Mt 26:6). It was there that a woman anointed his body with costly ointment. This was a controversial and prophetic act preparing Jesus for his burial and enhancing the gospel with loving consecration (vv 6-13).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFinalDaysinJerusalem\">The Final Days in Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>All four Gospels relate the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11; Mk 11:1-10; Lk 19:29-38; Jn 12:12-15). At this time multitudes greeted Jesus with praises acclaiming him as their king. This welcome stands in stark contrast with the crowd’s later cry for his crucifixion. In fact, it was the second crowd that was doing God’s bidding, since Jesus had not come to Jerusalem to reign but to die.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels place the cleansing of the temple as the first main event following Jesus’ entry into the city (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:15-17; Lk 19:45-46). The clouds of opposition had been thickening, but the audacity of Jesus in clearing out the money changers from the temple area was too much for the authorities (Mk 11:18; Lk 19:47). The die was cast and the Crucifixion loomed closer.<\/p>\n<p>It was during this period that further controversies developed between Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees (Mt 21:23–22:45). In several cases trick questions were posed in order to trap Jesus, but with consummate skill he turned their questions against them. His opposers eventually reached the point where they dared not ask him any more questions (22:46).<\/p>\n<p>Nearing his final hour, Jesus took the opportunity to instruct his disciples about future events, especially the end of the world. He reiterated the certainty of his return and mentioned various signs that would precede that coming (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). The purpose of this teaching was to provide a challenge to the disciples to be watchful (Mt 25:13) and diligent (vv 14-30). This section prepares the way for the events of the arrest, the trial, the scourging, and the cross carrying and crucifixion that followed soon after. But first we must note the importance of the Last Supper.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus sat at the table with his disciples on the night before he died, he wished to give them a simple means by which the significance of his death could be grasped (Mt 26:26-30; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20; 1 Cor 11:23-26). The use of the bread and wine for this purpose was a happy choice because they were basic elements in everyday life. Through this symbolic significance Jesus gave an interpretation of his approaching death—his body broken and his blood poured out for others. It was necessary for Jesus to provide this reminder that his sacrificial death would seal a completely new covenant. It was to be an authentic memorial to prevent the church from losing sight of the centrality of the cross.<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel does not relate the institution of the Last Supper. Nevertheless, it does record a significant act in which Jesus washed the feet of the disciples as an example of humility (Jn 13:1-20). He impressed on the disciples the principle of service to others. John follows this display of humility with a series of teachings Jesus gave on the eve of the Passion (chs 14–16). The most important feature of this teaching was the promise of the coming of the Holy Spirit to the disciples after Jesus had gone. Even with his mind occupied by thoughts of approaching death, Jesus showed himself more concerned about his disciples than about himself. This is evident in the prayer of Jesus in John 17. All the Evangelists refer in advance to the betrayal by Judas (Mt 26:21-25; Mk 14:18-21; Lk 22:21-23; Jn 13:21-30), which prepares readers for the final stages of the way of Jesus to the cross.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBetrayalandArrest\">The Betrayal and Arrest<\/p>\n<p>There is a sense in which the whole gospel story has been working up to a climax of rejection. The various outbursts of popular support were soon over and the determined opposition emerged as seemingly in control. In John’s Gospel the sense of approaching climax is expressed in terms of “his hour” (Jn 13:1). When this at length comes, the betrayal and arrest are seen as part of a larger plan. From the upper room where the Last Supper was eaten, Jesus went straight to the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:36-46; Mk 14:32-42; Lk 22:40-46), where he prayed to his Father with deep intensity and agony. In this we see part of what it cost Jesus to identify himself with man’s need. He prayed for the cup of suffering to pass from him but at the same time submitted to the Father’s will. The three disciples he took with him all fell asleep, while one of his other disciples, having betrayed his master, appeared at the gates at the head of the group who had come to arrest him. At the moment of confrontation with Judas, Jesus exhibits an amazing dignity when he addressed the betrayer as his “friend” (Mt 26:50). He offered no resistance when he was arrested and chided the crowd of people for their swords and clubs (v 55).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTrial\">The Trial<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was first taken to the house of Annas, one of the high priests, for a preliminary examination (Jn 18:13). During his trial, he was scorned by his enemies, and one of his disciples, Peter, denied him three times (Mt 26:69-75; Mk 14:66-72; Lk 22:54-62; Jn 18:15-27), as Jesus predicted he would (Mt 26:34; Mk 14:30; Jn 13:38). The official trial before the Sanhedrin was presided over by Caiaphas, who was nonplussed when Jesus at first refused to speak. At length Jesus predicted that the Son of Man would come on the clouds of heaven; this was enough to make the high priest charge him with blasphemy (Mk 14:62-64). Although he was spat upon and his face was struck, Jesus remained calm and dignified. He showed how much greater he was than those who were treating him with contempt.<\/p>\n<p>The further examinations before Pilate (Mt 27:1-2; Mk 15:1; Lk 23:1; Jn 18:28) and Herod (Lk 23:7-12) were no better examples of impartial justice. Again Jesus did not answer when asked about the charges before either Pilate (Mt 27:14) or Herod (Lk 23:9). He remained majestically silent, except to make a comment to Pilate about the true nature of his kingship (Jn 18:33-38). The pathetic governor declared Jesus innocent, offered the crowds the release of either Jesus or Barabbas, and then publicly disclaimed responsibility by washing his hands. Pilate then cruelly scourged Jesus and handed him over to be crucified. This judge has ever since been judged by the prisoner.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheCrucifixion\">The Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The reader of this scene cannot help but see man’s inhumanity to man—even the man of all men, Jesus Christ. The soldiers’ ribald mockery of Jesus (Mt 27:27-30), mixing a royal robe with a hurtful crown of thorns (Mk 15:17), compelling a passerby to carry the cross (Lk 23:26), the cruel procedure of nailing Jesus to the cross, the callous casting of lots for his garment (Jn 19:23-24), and the scornful challenge to him to use his power to escape (Mt 27:40-44)—all expose the cruelty of Jesus opponents. But against this is Jesus’ concern about the repentant criminal who was crucified with him (Lk 23:39-43), his concern for his mother (Jn 19:25-27), his prayer for forgiveness for those responsible for the Crucifixion (Lk 23:34), and his final triumphant cry (Mk 15:37)—all of which show a nobility of mind that contrasted strongly with the meanness of those about him. A few observers showed a better appreciation, like the centurion who was convinced of Jesus’ innocence (Mk 15:39) and the women who followed him and stood at a distance (Mt 27:55-56). There was one dark moment, as far as Jesus was concerned—his forsaken cry, which quickly passed (Mk 15:34). There was an accompanying darkness and an earthquake, as if nature itself were acknowledging the significance of the event. Even the temple veil was torn in two, as if it had no longer any right to bar the way into the Holy of Holies (Mt 27:51).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheBurialResurrectionandAscension\">The Burial, Resurrection, and Ascension<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ body was placed in a tomb that belonged to Joseph of Arimathea, who was assisted by Nicodemus in laying the body to rest (Mt 27:57-60; Jn 19:39). But the tomb played only an incidental part in the resurrection. The Evangelists concentrate on the appearances of Jesus not only on the day of resurrection but also subsequently. The disciples were convinced that Jesus was alive. Some, like Thomas, had doubts to overcome (Jn 20:24-29). Others, like John, were more ready to believe when they saw the empty tomb (vv 2-10). It is not without significance that the first to see the risen Lord was a woman, Mary Magdalene (Mt 27:61; 28:1, 5-9), whose presence at the cross put to shame those disciples who had run away (Mt 26:56; Jn 19:25).<\/p>\n<p>We may note that in his glorified, risen state Jesus was in a human form, although he was not at once recognized (Jn 20:15-16). There was a definite continuity with the Jesus the disciples had known. The appearances were occasions of both joy and instruction (cf. Lk 24:44 and Acts 1:3). The resurrection, in fact, had transformed the Crucifixion from a tragedy into a triumph. Forty days after his resurrection, Jesus ascended into heaven to join his Father in glory (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:17; Acts 1:9-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST Messiah, Savior, and founder of the Christian church. In providing a biography of Jesus Christ it must be borne in mind that each of the Gospels has its own distinctive purpose. Matthew, for instance, presents Jesus as the messianic King, whereas the emphasis in Mark is more on Jesus as the servant of all. Luke tends to present Jesus in a softer light, showing particularly his amazing compassion to the less fortunate, whereas John plunges the reader into a deeper and more spiritu...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24383,"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":30043,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55330,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","summary_en":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55331,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","summary_en":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55332,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","summary_en":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82956,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","summary_en":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82957,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","summary_en":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82958,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","summary_en":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110582,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","summary_en":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110583,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","summary_en":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110584,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","summary_en":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138208,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27–9:1<\/strong> This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","summary_en":"8:27–9:1 This section is the first cycle containing a prediction by Jesus of his suffering (8:31), an error by the disciples (8:32-33), and a collection of Jesus’ sayings about discipleship (8:34–9:1). Cp. 9:30–10:31.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138209,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-38<\/strong> Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","summary_en":"8:27-38 Peter’s declaration of Jesus as Messiah and Jesus’ first prediction of his death mark a turning point in Mark’s Gospel and a new stage in Jesus’ life. The question, “Who is this man?” raised by the disciples in 4:41, is now answered by Peter.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138210,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:27","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:27-28<\/strong> Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em> on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • <em>Who do people say I am?<\/em> As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • <em>John the Baptist:<\/em> See study note on 6:14. • <em>one of the other prophets:<\/em> Jesus was clearly considered a prophet (6:4; 14:65; Luke 7:16, 39; 13:33; 24:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","summary_en":"8:27-28 Philip the Tetrarch, son of Herod the Great, built Caesarea Philippi on the slopes of Mount Hermon about twenty-five miles (forty kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee. The more famous Caesarea on the coast had been built by Philip’s father. • Who do people say I am? As a good teacher, Jesus asked a question to elicit his disciples’ understanding. The response is similar to 6:14-16. • John the Baptist: See study note on 6:14. • one of the other prophets: Jesus was clearly considered...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65366,"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":92992,"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":120618,"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":148244,"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}],"28":[{"id":41577,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42425,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69203,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70051,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":96829,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97677,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124455,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Elijah","title_en":"Elijah","content_ro":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Elijah<\/h3>\n<p>Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 <span>BC<\/span>). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a widow in Zarephath, a town in Jezebel’s home territory of Sidon. The widow’s son died, but Elijah prayed for him and he was revived (1 Kgs 17:8-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the third year of drought, Elijah challenged Baal’s prophets to a contest on Mount Carmel to demonstrate the identity of the true God (1 Kgs 18:1-40). The prophets of Baal called on Baal in vain, becoming frantic to induce him to appear, while Elijah made fun of Baal. When it was Elijah’s turn, he poured water over his sacrifice and prayed a simple, powerful prayer. Fire immediately consumed the offering. In response, the people of Israel worshiped the Lord and, at Elijah’s direction, killed Baal’s prophets. Then Elijah prayed for rain, and the drought ended (1 Kgs 18:41-46).<\/p>\n<p>Even with such tremendous displays of God’s power, Ahab and Jezebel continued to lead Israel astray. Jezebel was furious that her prophets had been killed (1 Kgs 19:1-2). She threatened Elijah, who fled to the desert and asked God to take his life. Instead, an angel nourished him until he reached Mount Sinai. Elijah complained that he was the only remaining prophet of the Lord and that his life was at risk. God encouraged him in a quiet voice, gave him good news, then recommissioned him for service (1 Kgs 19:3-18).<\/p>\n<p>Elijah was single-minded in his devotion to the true God. He had an assistant named Elisha whom he trained well. At the end of Elijah’s earthly existence, rather than dying, he was caught up into heaven in a chariot of fire (2 Kgs 2:11-12). Elisha inherited Elijah’s prophetic mantle and continued the task of confronting false worship in Israel (see 2 Kgs 2:1–9:13; 13:14-25).<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament closes with the expectation that Elijah would return before the day of the Lord (Mal 4:5-6), an expectation that John the Baptist fulfilled, at least in part (see Matt 11:7-14; 17:10-13; Luke 1:17). Elijah appeared with Moses at Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-9). In Revelation 11:3-12, one of the two witnesses seems either to be Elijah himself or to be modeled after Elijah. Elijah’s life illustrates God’s kindness and the effectiveness of prayer (Luke 4:25-26; Rom 11:2-6; Jas 5:17-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 17:1–19:21; 21:1-29; 2 Kgs 1:1–2:25; 9:36; 10:10, 17; 2 Chr 21:12-15; Mal 4:5-6; Matt 11:14; 16:14; 17:1-13; 27:45-49; Mark 6:15; 8:28; 9:2-13; 15:33-36; Luke 1:17; 4:26; 9:28-36; John 1:19-28; Rom 11:1-6; Jas 5:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","summary_en":"Elijah Elijah from Tishbe served as prophet of Israel during the reigns of Ahab and Ahaziah (874–852 BC). His name means “my God is Yahweh,” and his ministry involved demonstrating that the Lord is the one true God and calling Israel back to the Lord. Under Ahab and Jezebel, Israel began worshiping Baal, a Canaanite fertility god of storm and rain, so God sent a drought upon Israel (1 Kgs 17:1). Elijah hid until the drought ended, and he was sustained by God. During that time, he lived with a...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125303,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John the Baptist","title_en":"John the Baptist","content_ro":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John the Baptist<\/h3>\n<p>John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13).<\/p>\n<p>John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births around the same time signaled the beginning of God’s redeeming work.<\/p>\n<p>John was filled with the Holy Spirit from birth and devoted his life to preparing people for the coming of the Lord (Luke 1:15-17). Living in the desert (Luke 1:80), he began preaching when he was about thirty years old. Dressed like a prophet and subsisting on desert food (locusts and wild honey, see Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6), he called everyone to repent and be baptized (Matt 3:1-2; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:1-3). He even castigated the religious leaders who came to hear him (Matt 3:7-10).<\/p>\n<p>Though John reluctantly baptized Jesus (Matt 3:13-17), he considered Jesus his superior, the one who would “baptize with the Holy Spirit” (John 1:33; Matt 3:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16; cp. John 3:23-30). He encouraged his followers to become Jesus’ disciples—and many did, including Andrew (1:35-40), Apollos (Acts 18:24-26), and the twelve disciples at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7).<\/p>\n<p>Herod Antipas received harsh judgment from John because of Herod’s unlawful marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife. To please Herodias, Herod imprisoned John and then beheaded him (Matt 14:3-12; Mark 6:17-29; Luke 3:19-20). John’s imprisonment marked the beginning of Jesus’ public preaching (Matt 4:12; Mark 1:14).<\/p>\n<p>Shortly before his death, John seemed to be confused about Jesus and sent messengers from prison to ask him if he really was the Messiah. Jesus did not do what most people anticipated the Messiah would do. Rather than bringing judgment and a visible kingdom, he brought forgiveness, healing, and a spiritual kingdom. To reassure John, Jesus spoke of the miraculous things God was doing through him (Luke 7:18-23).<\/p>\n<p>John remained faithful to his calling throughout his life, consistently preaching repentance and the judgment of God, even to people who had no desire to hear it. Jesus referred to John as one of the greatest servants of God who had ever lived (Matt 11:2-19; Luke 7:18-35), the end of a long line of prophets anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God (Luke 16:16). John stood on the threshold of the new age, proclaiming its coming to all who would hear.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 3:1-15; 4:12; 9:14; 11:2-19; 14:1-12; 16:14; 17:10-13; 21:24-27, 31-32; Mark 1:1-9, 14; 2:18; 6:14-29; 8:28; 9:11-13; 11:29-33; Luke 1:13-17, 36, 39-43, 57-66, 76-80; 3:1-21; 5:33; 7:18-35; 9:7-9, 19; 11:1; 16:16; 20:3-8; John 1:6-37; John 3:23-36; 4:1-3; 10:40-42; Acts 1:5; 10:37; 11:16; 18:25-26; 19:1-7<\/p>","summary_ro":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","summary_en":"John the Baptist John the Baptist was a fiery open-air preacher who called people to repent and be baptized. John worked in the role of Elijah, to prepare people for the coming of the Messiah (Mal 4:4-5; Matt 11:14; 17:12; Mark 9:13). John’s birth, like that of Jesus, was miraculous. His parents were elderly and had been unable to have children (Luke 1:5-25). His mother, Elizabeth, was a relative of Mary, Jesus’ mother (Luke 1:36), so John was related to Jesus. The two miraculous births aroun...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24937,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mediator Mediate","title_en":"Mediator Mediate","content_ro":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MEDIATE, MEDIATOR<\/h3>\n<p>The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The mediator could make God stop beating me, and I would no longer live in terror of his punishment. Then I could speak to him without fear, but I cannot do that in my own strength” (Jb 9:32-35).<\/p>\n<p>More familiar is the mediation of instruction concerning the divine character and will. The Mosaic covenant was given through the mediation of angels and of Moses (Ex 20:18-21; Dt 33:2; Acts 7:53; Gal 3:19; contrast Heb 6:13-17, where God, acting alone, “mediated” an oath). The terms of the covenant law were expounded by prophets who “stood in God’s council,” and by priests who communicated God’s mind by oracle, sacred lot, and pronounced blessing (Dt 10:8; 33:8-10; 2 Chr 15:3; Jer 23:10-11, 18-22, 31-34; Mi 3:11; Mal 2:7).<\/p>\n<p>Most familiar is the liturgical mediation of the priest, whether by Moses (Ex 24:4-8) or by an appointed person trained in the rituals of worship (28:1). Because of Israel’s emphasis upon the holiness of God, sacrificial expiation, or “covering,” of sin figured largely in priestly mediation. The priest represented before God the people’s penitence, confession, and prayers for forgiveness, bearing the tribes’ names on shoulders and breastplate, and represented God, in turn, assuring his favor, forgiveness, and protection (see Heb 5:1-4; 7:27–10:11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>It was natural that the mission of Jesus should be described in mediatorial terms, and first as that of a prophet speaking for God to humans, making God known (Mk 6:15; 8:28). Where applied to Jesus, the actual title “mediator” refers mainly to his institution of a new covenant, establishing God’s new relationship with people (Heb 8:6; 9:15; 12:24). The one other instance is 1 Timothy 2:5, where the unity of God requires a sole, unrivaled mediator, namely, Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This last reference mentions Christ’s giving himself as “a ransom for all.” This essentially priestly function is the theme of Hebrews. Christ as Son of God, divinely appointed, sinless, suffering, tempted, sympathizing, and obedient, is uniquely qualified to be High Priest of his people. As priest, he offers a perfect sacrifice and lives forever to intercede for those who draw near to God through him. This mediatorial ministry places Jesus at “the right hand of God.” His intercession for people is mentioned also in Romans 8:34 and probably in 1 John 2:1, where ancient Greek commentators, <span>neb<\/span>, and other authoritative sources so understand “paraclete,” here applied to Jesus. His mediatorial sacrifice is mentioned in Matthew (Mt 26:28), John (Jn 1:29), Romans (Rom 3:25), and 1 John (1 Jn 1:7; 2:2; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p>Still more significant is the insistence, everywhere in the NT, that man’s knowledge of God, salvation, and hope come through Christ alone. Made poor for our sakes, he died and rose “for us”; our peace, access to God, reconciliation, expiation of sin, grace, truth, prayer, and “all spiritual blessings” are “through him,” “in him,” “through his blood,” and “in his name.” The purpose of God focuses in him; he mediated at Creation and at redemption (Col 1:15, 22); in him all the fullness of God dwells, and the face of Christ reveals God’s glory. No one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son reveals him; no one comes to the Father but by him; neither is there salvation in any other.<\/p>\n<p>Christ’s mediation is the fulfillment and end of all mediation between God and humankind. The book of Hebrews opens with the assertion that Christ surpasses all other mediators—angels, Moses, the Aaronic priesthood. His is a timeless priesthood, like Melchizedek’s. His sacrifice is unrepeatable, “once for all time,” and by it we have been consecrated to God “for all time.” The covenant he established between God and people offers better promises, sacrifice, sanctuary, and hope (Heb 7:19; 8:6; 9:1, 11-15). Christ’s mediation so far excels all others that it can never be superseded; he is priest without rival and forever (cf. 1 Tm 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Without using the priestly analogy, John emphasizes the same truth. The gulf between divine and human has been crossed, decisively and finally, by the Incarnation. Instead of standing between God and man, Christ unites both within himself by becoming man. Mediating in the beginning at Creation, Christ is himself the Word, which from God’s side mediates God’s mind, embodies God’s message, and conveys God’s power. No one has seen God at any time, but as unique Son and divine, Jesus “expounds” God (Jn 1:18). From the human side, Jesus prays for the disciples (ch 17), offers perfect obedience, lays down his life for his flock, and offers the unblemished sacrifice that bears away the sin of the world.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Reconciliation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","summary_en":"MEDIATE, MEDIATOR The act of an intermediary, go-between, or expert in divine things, not to negotiate agreement or compromise but to approach God on behalf of others, and so to convey desired knowledge and reassurance with divine authority. In the Old Testament Job voices longing for such a mediator (translated here from the LXX): “God is not a mortal like me, so I cannot argue with him or take him to trial. If only there were a mediator who could bring us together, but there is none. The me...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31581,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31662,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophetess Prophet","title_en":"Prophetess Prophet","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHET, PROPHETESS<\/h3>\n<p>A man or woman chosen by God to speak for him and to foretell events in the divine plan.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• The Titles and History of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Inspiration<\/p>\n<p>• True and False Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Function of the Prophet<\/p>\n<p>• Methods of Communication<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus raised the widow’s son from the dead, the onlookers responded by saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” (Lk 7:16; cf. Mk 6:15; 8:28). In Jewish religious thought, the most vivid and formative religious happenings found their focus in the call and ministry of a prophet, through whom God communicated his word to his people. In their appraisal of Jesus, the people were in fact more correct than they knew, for in him God had in reality visited them and he, though so much more than a prophet, was in fact the crown and climax of the prophetic order predicted by Moses (Dt 18:15-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTitlesandHistoryoftheProphets\">The Titles and History of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>The main words used to describe such individuals in the OT are “prophet” (see Jgs 6:8), “man of God” (see 2 Kgs 4:9) and “seer” (see 1 Sm 9:9; 2 Sm 24:11).<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “prophet” seems to have the idea “called” as its first emphasis: God takes the initiative, selects, summons, and sends the prophet (e.g., Jer 1:4-5; 7:25; Am 7:14). “Man of God” speaks of the relationship into which the prophet is brought by his call: he is now “God’s man” and is recognized as belonging to him (2 Kgs 4:9). “Seer” indicates the new and remarkable powers of perception granted to the prophet. In Hebrew, as in English, the ordinary verb “to see” is used also of understanding (“I see what you mean”) and of the power of perception into the nature and meaning of things (“He sees things very clearly”). In the case of the prophets, their powers of “perception” were raised far above normal because the Lord inspired them to become vehicles of his message.<\/p>\n<p>The line of great prophets upon whose shoulders the story of the OT moves forward began with Moses, who is recognized as the prophet par excellence (Dt 34:10). This was a correct perception, for all the distinctive marks of a prophet belonged to Moses: the call (Ex 3:1–4:17; cf. Is 6; Jer 1:4-19; Ez 1–3; Hos 1:2; Am 7:14-15), the awareness of the importance of historical events as the acts of God in which he confirmed his word (Ex 3:12; 4:21-23), ethical and social concern (2:11-13), and championship of the helpless (v 17).<\/p>\n<p>But the comment in Deuteronomy 34:10 not only looks back to the greatness of Moses but also looks forward to the coming of a prophet like Moses. This accords with his own prediction (Dt 18:15-19), which undoubtedly anticipates a single, great individual prophet. Moses makes a striking comparison with himself—the coming prophet will fill just such a role as Moses filled at Mt Sinai (Dt 18:16). On that occasion, Moses acted as the prophetic mediator of the voice of God in a unique sense, for at Sinai God fashioned the old covenant into its completed form. In expecting a prophet cast in this mold, Moses was therefore looking forward to another covenant-mediator, Jesus Christ himself.<\/p>\n<p>The expectation for this great prophet was kept alive as God kept sending prophets to his people. In each case, such a prophet was known to be true by his likeness to Moses; in each case he would be viewed with excitement by genuine believers to see whether he was the great one come at last. In this light we can understand the excitement of the people who saw Jesus raise the dead (Lk 7:16).<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions the existence of prophetic groups, sometimes called “schools.” Elisha clearly had such a group under his instruction (2 Kgs 6:1), and “sons of the prophets” (e.g., 2 Kgs 2:3, 5; Am 7:14) probably refers to “prophet in training” under the care of a master prophet. “Guilds” would be a better description of the groups in 1 Samuel 10:5-11. Such groups enjoyed an enthusiastic, ecstatic worship of the Lord, touched with a marked activity of the Spirit of God. But at the heart of their devotion was “prophecy”—that is, a declaration of the truth about God himself. After this early period, the prophetic groups seem to have diminished in significance (judging by the disappearance of plain references similar to those in 1 Samuel), and the gradual change of things from ecstasy to a more direct ministry of the word could well lie behind the comment in 1 Samuel 9:9.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inspiration\">Inspiration<\/p>\n<p>The Spirit of the Lord whose inspiration lay behind the activities of the ecstatic groups (1 Sm 10:6, 10; 19:20, 23) was active in all the prophets, and the claim to divine inspiration is plainly registered from time to time (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:24; Neh 9:30; Hos 9:7; Jl 2:28-29; Mi 3:8; cf. 1 Chr 12:18; 2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20). The Spirit inspired men and women to speak the very words of God (cf. 2 Pt 1:21).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah claims that the hand of God was laid on his mouth, putting the words of God into his lips (Jer 1:9); Ezekiel records how he was made to eat a scroll, by which means he received the words the Lord had written and was thus enabled to speak what the Lord called “my words” (Ez 2:7–4:4). The miracle is stated in a nutshell at the beginning of Amos (1:1, 3): “The words of Amos . . . Thus saith the <span>Lord<\/span>.” Though the words were truly Amos’s words, the words were also the Lord’s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrueandFalseProphets\">True and False Prophets<\/p>\n<p>False prophets were to be separated from true prophets by means of three tests. The first test was doctrinal. In Deuteronomy 13 the motive of the false prophet was to draw the people away from the God who had revealed himself in the exodus (Dt 13:2, 5-7, 10). Notwithstanding that the word of the false prophet might be supported by apparent signs and wonders (vv 1-2), it was to be refused—not simply because it introduced novelty (vv 2, 6) but because that novelty contradicted the revelation of the Lord at the exodus (vv 5, 10). The first test was thus doctrinal and required that the people of God have knowledge of the truth whereby they could, by comparison, recognize error.<\/p>\n<p>The second test was practical and required patience. It is stated in Deuteronomy 18:21-22: the word of the Lord always comes to pass. This requires patience because, as Deuteronomy 13:1-2 indicates, a false word may be supported by an apparent spiritual proof. The call of Deuteronomy 18:21-22 is a call for patience. Should there be any real doubt about whether a prophetic word is true or false, wait for the confirmatory turn of events.<\/p>\n<p>The third test is moral and calls for watchful discernment. Jeremiah, of all the prophets, was most afflicted in his spirit by the presence of false prophets and gave the longest and most sustained consideration to the problem (Jer 23:9-40). His answer is striking and challenging: the false prophet will be found out as a man of unholy life (vv 11-14) whose message has no note of moral rebuke but rather encourages men in their sin (vv 16-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFunctionoftheProphet\">The Function of the Prophet<\/p>\n<p>It is sometimes said that prophets are not “foretellers” but “forthtellers.” As far as the OT is concerned, however, the prophets are forthtellers (declaring the truth about God) by being foretellers (predicting what God will do). Prediction is neither an occasional nor a marginal activity in the OT; it is the way the prophet went about his work. Deuteronomy 18:9-15 explains the function of the prophet in Israel: the surrounding nations are revealed as probing into the future by means of a variety of fortune-telling techniques (vv 10-11); these things are forbidden to Israel on the ground of being abominable to the Lord (v 12). Israel’s distinctiveness is maintained in that the nations probe the future by diviners, whereas the Lord gives Israel a prophet (vv 13-15). Elisha (2 Kgs 4:27) is surprised when foreknowledge is denied him; Amos teaches that foreknowledge is the privilege of the prophets in their fellowship with God (Am 3:7). But prediction in Israel was totally unlike prognostication among the nations, for in no way was it motivated by a mere curiosity about the future.<\/p>\n<p>First, biblical prediction arose out of the needs of the present. In Isaiah 39 it is the faithless commitment of Hezekiah to rely for security on a military understanding with Babylon that prompts Isaiah to announce the future Babylonian captivity. Isaiah does not snatch the name Babylon out of thin air; it is given to him within the situation in which he was called to minister.<\/p>\n<p>Second, prediction aimed at giving knowledge of the future was to result in moral reformation in the present. The moral exhortations of the prophets find their explanation in what the Lord is about to do (e.g., Is 31:6-7; Am 5:6).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the predicted course of events was aimed at stabilizing the faith of the true believer in dark times. For example, various passages in Isaiah (Is 9:1-7; 11:1-16; 40:1-3) have the effect of lifting the eyes out of the immediately preceding grim tragedy to the coming glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofCommunication\">Methods of Communication<\/p>\n<p>In foretelling, the prophets were forthtelling—they were proclaiming the wonderful works of God (cf. the definition of prophecy in Acts 2:11, 17). For the most part, this proclamation was by direct word of mouth. The prophets were men of the word. Their words were like messengers sent by God (Is 55:11), endowed with all the divine efficacy of the creative word of Genesis 1:3 (cf. Ps 33:6). Sometimes the efficacy of the word was enhanced by being accompanied by a sign or symbolic action (e.g., Jer 13:1-11; 19; Ez 4:1-17; 24:15-24), or identified intimately with a person (Is 7:3; cf. 8:1-4). Such things were like visual aids, whereby the word would be made clearer to those present. But it would seem that the intention of the symbolic action (sometimes called an “acted oracle”) was not so much to make understanding easier but to give more power and effect to the word as it was sent like a messenger into that situation. This is the conclusion to be drawn from 2 Kings 13:14-19, where the extent to which the king “embodied” the word in action determined the extent to which the word would prove effective in bringing events to pass.<\/p>\n<p>The final embodiment of the words of the prophets is in the books that have been preserved. Jeremiah 36 may be taken as an object lesson in the fact that the prophets took the time and trouble to record their spoken messages in writing: there was stress on careful word-by-word dictation (Jer 36:6, 17-18). But the actual literary form of the messages themselves tells the same tale. What we find in the books of the prophets cannot be the preached form of their words but rather the studied wording in which they preserved (and filed away) their sermons. It stands to reason that men who were conscious of communicating the very words of God would see to it that those words were not lost. We may take it for granted that every prophet preserved a written record of his ministry. Whether each of the named prophets was himself directly responsible for the final form of his book, we are not told and have no way of knowing. The careful way in which the books of Isaiah or Amos, for example, are arranged is best suited by assuming that the author was also his own editor.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Prophecy; Prophets, False.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHET, PROPHETESS<\/h3>\n<p>A man or woman chosen by God to speak for him and to foretell events in the divine plan.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• The Titles and History of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Inspiration<\/p>\n<p>• True and False Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Function of the Prophet<\/p>\n<p>• Methods of Communication<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus raised the widow’s son from the dead, the onlookers responded by saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” (Lk 7:16; cf. Mk 6:15; 8:28). In Jewish religious thought, the most vivid and formative religious happenings found their focus in the call and ministry of a prophet, through whom God communicated his word to his people. In their appraisal of Jesus, the people were in fact more correct than they knew, for in him God had in reality visited them and he, though so much more than a prophet, was in fact the crown and climax of the prophetic order predicted by Moses (Dt 18:15-19).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTitlesandHistoryoftheProphets\">The Titles and History of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>The main words used to describe such individuals in the OT are “prophet” (see Jgs 6:8), “man of God” (see 2 Kgs 4:9) and “seer” (see 1 Sm 9:9; 2 Sm 24:11).<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “prophet” seems to have the idea “called” as its first emphasis: God takes the initiative, selects, summons, and sends the prophet (e.g., Jer 1:4-5; 7:25; Am 7:14). “Man of God” speaks of the relationship into which the prophet is brought by his call: he is now “God’s man” and is recognized as belonging to him (2 Kgs 4:9). “Seer” indicates the new and remarkable powers of perception granted to the prophet. In Hebrew, as in English, the ordinary verb “to see” is used also of understanding (“I see what you mean”) and of the power of perception into the nature and meaning of things (“He sees things very clearly”). In the case of the prophets, their powers of “perception” were raised far above normal because the Lord inspired them to become vehicles of his message.<\/p>\n<p>The line of great prophets upon whose shoulders the story of the OT moves forward began with Moses, who is recognized as the prophet par excellence (Dt 34:10). This was a correct perception, for all the distinctive marks of a prophet belonged to Moses: the call (Ex 3:1–4:17; cf. Is 6; Jer 1:4-19; Ez 1–3; Hos 1:2; Am 7:14-15), the awareness of the importance of historical events as the acts of God in which he confirmed his word (Ex 3:12; 4:21-23), ethical and social concern (2:11-13), and championship of the helpless (v 17).<\/p>\n<p>But the comment in Deuteronomy 34:10 not only looks back to the greatness of Moses but also looks forward to the coming of a prophet like Moses. This accords with his own prediction (Dt 18:15-19), which undoubtedly anticipates a single, great individual prophet. Moses makes a striking comparison with himself—the coming prophet will fill just such a role as Moses filled at Mt Sinai (Dt 18:16). On that occasion, Moses acted as the prophetic mediator of the voice of God in a unique sense, for at Sinai God fashioned the old covenant into its completed form. In expecting a prophet cast in this mold, Moses was therefore looking forward to another covenant-mediator, Jesus Christ himself.<\/p>\n<p>The expectation for this great prophet was kept alive as God kept sending prophets to his people. In each case, such a prophet was known to be true by his likeness to Moses; in each case he would be viewed with excitement by genuine believers to see whether he was the great one come at last. In this light we can understand the excitement of the people who saw Jesus raise the dead (Lk 7:16).<\/p>\n<p>The OT mentions the existence of prophetic groups, sometimes called “schools.” Elisha clearly had such a group under his instruction (2 Kgs 6:1), and “sons of the prophets” (e.g., 2 Kgs 2:3, 5; Am 7:14) probably refers to “prophet in training” under the care of a master prophet. “Guilds” would be a better description of the groups in 1 Samuel 10:5-11. Such groups enjoyed an enthusiastic, ecstatic worship of the Lord, touched with a marked activity of the Spirit of God. But at the heart of their devotion was “prophecy”—that is, a declaration of the truth about God himself. After this early period, the prophetic groups seem to have diminished in significance (judging by the disappearance of plain references similar to those in 1 Samuel), and the gradual change of things from ecstasy to a more direct ministry of the word could well lie behind the comment in 1 Samuel 9:9.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inspiration\">Inspiration<\/p>\n<p>The Spirit of the Lord whose inspiration lay behind the activities of the ecstatic groups (1 Sm 10:6, 10; 19:20, 23) was active in all the prophets, and the claim to divine inspiration is plainly registered from time to time (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:24; Neh 9:30; Hos 9:7; Jl 2:28-29; Mi 3:8; cf. 1 Chr 12:18; 2 Chr 15:1; 20:14; 24:20). The Spirit inspired men and women to speak the very words of God (cf. 2 Pt 1:21).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah claims that the hand of God was laid on his mouth, putting the words of God into his lips (Jer 1:9); Ezekiel records how he was made to eat a scroll, by which means he received the words the Lord had written and was thus enabled to speak what the Lord called “my words” (Ez 2:7–4:4). The miracle is stated in a nutshell at the beginning of Amos (1:1, 3): “The words of Amos . . . Thus saith the <span>Lord<\/span>.” Though the words were truly Amos’s words, the words were also the Lord’s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TrueandFalseProphets\">True and False Prophets<\/p>\n<p>False prophets were to be separated from true prophets by means of three tests. The first test was doctrinal. In Deuteronomy 13 the motive of the false prophet was to draw the people away from the God who had revealed himself in the exodus (Dt 13:2, 5-7, 10). Notwithstanding that the word of the false prophet might be supported by apparent signs and wonders (vv 1-2), it was to be refused—not simply because it introduced novelty (vv 2, 6) but because that novelty contradicted the revelation of the Lord at the exodus (vv 5, 10). The first test was thus doctrinal and required that the people of God have knowledge of the truth whereby they could, by comparison, recognize error.<\/p>\n<p>The second test was practical and required patience. It is stated in Deuteronomy 18:21-22: the word of the Lord always comes to pass. This requires patience because, as Deuteronomy 13:1-2 indicates, a false word may be supported by an apparent spiritual proof. The call of Deuteronomy 18:21-22 is a call for patience. Should there be any real doubt about whether a prophetic word is true or false, wait for the confirmatory turn of events.<\/p>\n<p>The third test is moral and calls for watchful discernment. Jeremiah, of all the prophets, was most afflicted in his spirit by the presence of false prophets and gave the longest and most sustained consideration to the problem (Jer 23:9-40). His answer is striking and challenging: the false prophet will be found out as a man of unholy life (vv 11-14) whose message has no note of moral rebuke but rather encourages men in their sin (vv 16-22).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheFunctionoftheProphet\">The Function of the Prophet<\/p>\n<p>It is sometimes said that prophets are not “foretellers” but “forthtellers.” As far as the OT is concerned, however, the prophets are forthtellers (declaring the truth about God) by being foretellers (predicting what God will do). Prediction is neither an occasional nor a marginal activity in the OT; it is the way the prophet went about his work. Deuteronomy 18:9-15 explains the function of the prophet in Israel: the surrounding nations are revealed as probing into the future by means of a variety of fortune-telling techniques (vv 10-11); these things are forbidden to Israel on the ground of being abominable to the Lord (v 12). Israel’s distinctiveness is maintained in that the nations probe the future by diviners, whereas the Lord gives Israel a prophet (vv 13-15). Elisha (2 Kgs 4:27) is surprised when foreknowledge is denied him; Amos teaches that foreknowledge is the privilege of the prophets in their fellowship with God (Am 3:7). But prediction in Israel was totally unlike prognostication among the nations, for in no way was it motivated by a mere curiosity about the future.<\/p>\n<p>First, biblical prediction arose out of the needs of the present. In Isaiah 39 it is the faithless commitment of Hezekiah to rely for security on a military understanding with Babylon that prompts Isaiah to announce the future Babylonian captivity. Isaiah does not snatch the name Babylon out of thin air; it is given to him within the situation in which he was called to minister.<\/p>\n<p>Second, prediction aimed at giving knowledge of the future was to result in moral reformation in the present. The moral exhortations of the prophets find their explanation in what the Lord is about to do (e.g., Is 31:6-7; Am 5:6).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the predicted course of events was aimed at stabilizing the faith of the true believer in dark times. For example, various passages in Isaiah (Is 9:1-7; 11:1-16; 40:1-3) have the effect of lifting the eyes out of the immediately preceding grim tragedy to the coming glory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MethodsofCommunication\">Methods of Communication<\/p>\n<p>In foretelling, the prophets were forthtelling—they were proclaiming the wonderful works of God (cf. the definition of prophecy in Acts 2:11, 17). For the most part, this proclamation was by direct word of mouth. The prophets were men of the word. Their words were like messengers sent by God (Is 55:11), endowed with all the divine efficacy of the creative word of Genesis 1:3 (cf. Ps 33:6). Sometimes the efficacy of the word was enhanced by being accompanied by a sign or symbolic action (e.g., Jer 13:1-11; 19; Ez 4:1-17; 24:15-24), or identified intimately with a person (Is 7:3; cf. 8:1-4). Such things were like visual aids, whereby the word would be made clearer to those present. But it would seem that the intention of the symbolic action (sometimes called an “acted oracle”) was not so much to make understanding easier but to give more power and effect to the word as it was sent like a messenger into that situation. This is the conclusion to be drawn from 2 Kings 13:14-19, where the extent to which the king “embodied” the word in action determined the extent to which the word would prove effective in bringing events to pass.<\/p>\n<p>The final embodiment of the words of the prophets is in the books that have been preserved. Jeremiah 36 may be taken as an object lesson in the fact that the prophets took the time and trouble to record their spoken messages in writing: there was stress on careful word-by-word dictation (Jer 36:6, 17-18). But the actual literary form of the messages themselves tells the same tale. What we find in the books of the prophets cannot be the preached form of their words but rather the studied wording in which they preserved (and filed away) their sermons. It stands to reason that men who were conscious of communicating the very words of God would see to it that those words were not lost. We may take it for granted that every prophet preserved a written record of his ministry. Whether each of the named prophets was himself directly responsible for the final form of his book, we are not told and have no way of knowing. The careful way in which the books of Isaiah or Amos, for example, are arranged is best suited by assuming that the author was also his own editor.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Prophecy; Prophets, False.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHET, PROPHETESS A man or woman chosen by God to speak for him and to foretell events in the divine plan. Preview • Introduction • The Titles and History of the Prophets • Inspiration • True and False Prophets • The Function of the Prophet • Methods of Communication Introduction When Jesus raised the widow’s son from the dead, the onlookers responded by saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” (Lk 7:16; cf. Mk 6:15; 8:28). In Jewish religious thought, the most vivid and formative rel...","summary_en":"PROPHET, PROPHETESS A man or woman chosen by God to speak for him and to foretell events in the divine plan. Preview • Introduction • The Titles and History of the Prophets • Inspiration • True and False Prophets • The Function of the Prophet • Methods of Communication Introduction When Jesus raised the widow’s son from the dead, the onlookers responded by saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” (Lk 7:16; cf. Mk 6:15; 8:28). In Jewish religious thought, the most vivid and formative rel...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":42124,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69750,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97376,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125002,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55333,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","summary_en":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82959,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","summary_en":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110585,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","summary_en":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138211,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:29","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:29-30<\/strong> <em>But who do you say I am?<\/em> In the Greek text, <em>you<\/em> is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, <em>You are the Messiah<\/em>. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command <em>not to tell anyone about him<\/em> indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","summary_en":"8:29-30 But who do you say I am? In the Greek text, you is emphatic. Peter responded for the group, You are the Messiah. Peter’s confession was correct, as the command not to tell anyone about him indicates (see 3:11-12; see also 1:1; 14:61-62; Matt 16:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65361,"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":65424,"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":92987,"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":93050,"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":120613,"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":120676,"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":148239,"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":148302,"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}],"31":[{"id":42127,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69753,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97379,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125005,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Simon Peter","title_en":"Simon Peter","content_ro":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Simon Peter<\/h3>\n<p>Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew name <em>Simeon<\/em> (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. <em>Cephas<\/em> is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as <em>Petros<\/em> (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42).<\/p>\n<p>Though Bethsaida was Peter’s hometown (John 1:44), he later lived in Capernaum. He was married (1 Cor 9:5), and at one point, when visiting Peter’s home, Jesus healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15; Mark 1:29-31; Luke 4:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>Originally fishermen, Peter and his brother Andrew were among the first to be called by Jesus to be disciples, together with James and John, their fishing partners (Matt 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-20; cp. Luke 5:1-11; John 1:35-51). They were ordinary, minimally educated working men (Acts 4:13).<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s name occurs first on every list of the twelve apostles (Matt 10:2; Mark 3:16; Luke 6:14; Acts 1:13). Together with the brothers James and John, Peter was part of an “inner circle” of disciples who were with Jesus on certain special occasions—the healing of Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), Jesus’ transfiguration (Matt 17:1-2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28-29), and Jesus’ prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was bold and impulsive (Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29; Luke 5:8; 22:33; John 13:36-37; 21:7), and the first of the disciples to confess his belief in Jesus as the Messiah (Matt 16:15-16; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20). He reproved Jesus when Jesus spoke of his coming death—a notion that did not fit Peter’s view of the Messiah—and was in turn rebuked by Jesus for it (Matt 16:21-23; Mark 8:31-33). However, Jesus spoke of Peter as a key person he would use to build the church (Matt 16:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Peter surreptitiously entered the courtyard of the high priest when Jesus was taken there for interrogation. But when challenged by people who recognized him (partly because of his Galilean accent), he vigorously denied all knowledge of Jesus (26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62)—as Jesus had said he would, in spite of Peter’s insistence that he would never do so (Matt 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34). Peter immediately felt deep remorse.<\/p>\n<p>After the news of Jesus’ resurrection, Peter was one of the first to run to the tomb to see if it was true (John 20:3-7), and he appears to have been the first of the Twelve to whom the risen Jesus showed himself (Luke 24:33-34; 1 Cor 15:5). Much of Jesus’ conversation recorded in John 21 was with Peter, whom Jesus encouraged to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>Following the coming of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13), Peter quickly emerged as the primary spokesman for the early Christians. From that point on, as recorded in Acts 2:14–12:25, he played a crucial role in the spread of the gospel in Judea, boldly preaching to the crowds (Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26), healing people (Acts 3:1-11; 5:12-16; 9:32-43), and—even under arrest—speaking fearlessly to the authorities (Acts 4:1-20; 5:26-32). Twice he miraculously escaped from prison (Acts 5:18-25; 12:6-11). He also exercised leadership in the administrative affairs of the quickly growing community of disciples (Acts 5:3-11).<\/p>\n<p>Peter was the first to bring the Good News to Gentiles (Acts 10:1-48; see Matt 16:18). And he played a key role in the Jerusalem council concerning Gentile converts, arguing that Gentiles should not be compelled to observe the law of Moses but should be accepted on the basis of their faith in Christ alone (Acts 15:7-11). Later, however, when visiting Antioch, he was inconsistent on this point—resulting in a rebuke from Paul (Gal 2:11-16).<\/p>\n<p>Other than his taking his wife with him on at least some of his mission trips (1 Cor 9:5), few details are known about Peter’s later life and missionary work. (He may have spent time at Corinth; see 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). Widespread early tradition says that Peter was crucified—like his Lord, just as Jesus had predicted (John 21:18-19)—in Rome during Nero’s persecution of Christians in <span>AD<\/span> 64–65. The reliability of the tradition that he was crucified upside-down is less certain.<\/p>\n<p>Peter was likely the source of the material recorded by Mark in his Gospel, which Mark probably learned while he was assisting Peter in his evangelistic work in Italy near the end of his life. Peter is also traditionally understood to be the author of 1 Peter (written from Rome—“Babylon,” 1 Pet 5:13) and 2 Peter.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Peter stands as a reassuring example of Christ’s forgiving grace for those who know they’ve failed him—and of the way Christ can graciously restore and use such people for his glory, in spite of their failings.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:18-20; 8:14; 10:2; 14:28-31; 15:15; 16:16-19, 22-23; 17:1-4, 24-27; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33-45, 58, 69-75; Mark 1:16-18, 29-30, 36-37; 3:16; 5:37; 8:29-33; 9:2-6; 10:28; 11:21; 13:3-4; 14:29-42, 54, 66-72; 16:7-8; Luke 4:38; 5:3-10; 6:14; 8:45, 51; 9:20, 28-33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:8, 31-34, 55-62; 24:12, 34; John 1:40-42, 44; 6:8, 68; 13:6-10, 24, 36-38; 18:10-11, 15-18, 25-27; 20:2-6; 21:2-21; Acts 1:1–12:25; 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-16; 1 Pet 1:1–5:14; 2 Pet 1:1–3:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","summary_en":"Simon Peter Simon Peter was the most prominent of the twelve apostles. After Jesus’ death, he became the primary spokesman for the early Christians in Jerusalem and was the apostle primarily responsible for evangelizing the Jews (Gal 2:7-8). The Hebrew name Simeon (transliterated in English as “Simon”) was probably his original name. Cephas is the transliteration of an Aramaic name given him by Jesus, meaning “rock”—translated in Greek as Petros (English “Peter”; see Matt 16:17-18; John 1:42)...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":8196,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Crucifixion","title_en":"Crucifixion","content_ro":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","summary_en":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14616,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19612,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24341,"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":31598,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35859,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55334,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","summary_en":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55335,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","summary_en":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82960,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","summary_en":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82961,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","summary_en":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110586,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","summary_en":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110587,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","summary_en":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138212,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31-38<\/strong> <em>Then<\/em> Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would <em>suffer<\/em> and <em>be killed<\/em> in Jerusalem and <em>three days later<\/em> . . . <em>rise from the dead.<\/em> Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","summary_en":"8:31-38 Then Jesus began to teach the disciples that he would suffer and be killed in Jerusalem and three days later . . . rise from the dead. Jesus now explicitly predicted what he had revealed in veiled form (2:19-20). In response, Peter objected, so Jesus taught him and the other disciples the nature of his mission and what it really means to follow him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138213,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:31","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:31","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:31<\/strong> It was a divine necessity that Jesus <em>must suffer<\/em> (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was <em>the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law<\/em> (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he <em>would rise from the dead.<\/em> • <em>Three days later<\/em> is a synonym for <em>on the third day<\/em> (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and <em>after three days and three nights<\/em> (Matt 12:40).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","summary_en":"8:31 It was a divine necessity that Jesus must suffer (see also 9:11; 13:7, 10). The immediate cause for Jesus’ suffering was the elders, the leading priests, and the teachers of religious law (see 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53), but the ultimate cause was the will of God. • Jesus’ death would not be the end, for three days later he would rise from the dead. • Three days later is a synonym for on the third day (Matt 16:21; Luke 9:22) and after three days and three nights (Matt 12:40).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61394,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God or Satan?","title_en":"God or Satan?","content_ro":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","summary_en":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65316,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65426,"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":65555,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65633,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89020,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God or Satan?","title_en":"God or Satan?","content_ro":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","summary_en":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92942,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93052,"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":93181,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93259,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116646,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God or Satan?","title_en":"God or Satan?","content_ro":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","summary_en":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120568,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120678,"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":120807,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120885,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144272,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God or Satan?","title_en":"God or Satan?","content_ro":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God or Satan?<\/h3>\n<p>Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective.<\/p>\n<p>There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the <span>Lord<\/span> . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up against Israel and caused David to take a census of the people of Israel”).<\/p>\n<p>Second Samuel 24:1-25 tells the census story from God’s perspective as the primary agent; God permitted Satan’s action in order to fulfill his own purpose.<\/p>\n<p>This phenomenon is not uncommon in Scripture. Matthew 4:1 contains a similar instance of dual agency, where Jesus is led out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit to be tempted by the devil. Perhaps the most notable similar experience is Job’s trial: It was brought on by Satan and permitted by God—after the Lord had spoken glowingly about Job (Job 1:6–2:7). Through all the trials that followed, Job’s heart was righteous despite Satan’s attempts to elicit a curse against God. Similarly, 2 Corinthians 12:7 teaches that a God-sent affliction can be delivered by a messenger from Satan. When Paul wrote that he was given a “thorn,” he used a passive verb, indicating that this affliction was given by God.<\/p>\n<p>Satan works in many ways in an attempt to discourage or destroy God’s people. Yet God is sovereign. God does not author evil, but sometimes God makes use of others’ evil deeds to accomplish his good purposes (Gen 50:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 24:1-25; 1 Chr 21:1-30; Job 1:8–2:10; Matt 4:1-11; 12:22-37; Mark 8:31-33; John 13:21-31; Rom 8:28; 1 Cor 5:1-5; 2 Cor 12:6-10; Eph 2:1-7; Rev 20:1-3, 7-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","summary_en":"God or Satan? Who is responsible for trials and difficulties? Strangely, Scripture attributes some instances to God, some to Satan, and some to both. How can this be? The difference is one of perspective. There is a notable difference between the accounts of David’s census in Samuel and in Chronicles. Second Samuel 24:1 attributes the census taking to God (“the Lord . . . caused David to harm them by taking a census”), while 1 Chronicles 21:1 attributes the action to Satan (“Satan rose up aga...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148194,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148304,"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":148433,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148511,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night","title_en":"Jesus’ Final Night","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus’ Final Night<\/h3>\n<p>When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming.<\/p>\n<p>So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them about the coming of the Holy Spirit, and prayed for his followers (John 14:1–17:26). Jesus also established the new covenant (Mark 14:22-24). Jesus was now the Passover Lamb—his body and blood are now the sacrifice that saves his people from judgment, fulfilling the same purpose as the lamb at the first Passover.<\/p>\n<p>It was on Passover that God had struck down all the firstborn males of Egypt but had spared those of Israel. Now Jesus would be struck down so that his people could be spared—just as the prophets had predicted (e.g., Zech 12:10; 13:7). Jesus warned his disciples that this was about to happen and that they were about to desert him (Mark 14:27). Jesus also warned his disciples that he would be betrayed by one of them (Mark 14:18).<\/p>\n<p>After the meal, Jesus and his disciples walked to the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives, where Jesus prayed in agony, submitting his will to the Father (Mark 14:26-42). Judas, the disciple who betrayed Jesus, then approached with a group of soldiers, who arrested Jesus (Mark 14:43-49). Jesus’ disciples fled (Mark 14:50-52), and Jesus was taken to the house of the high priest for an overnight trial, during which Peter denied Jesus three times (Mark 14:53-72).<\/p>\n<p>While Jesus’ final night was marked by tragedy, nothing that happened was outside of his foreknowledge. Everything occurred according to God’s plan and was necessary in order to fulfill Scripture and to usher in the events which followed (his death and resurrection).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 26:17-56; Mark 14:12-52; Luke 22:7-46; John 13:1–18:11; 1 Cor 11:23-34<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","summary_en":"Jesus’ Final Night When Jesus went into Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, he knew it was his final night. He had come to Jerusalem to “suffer many terrible things and . . . be killed” (Mark 8:31). His disciples had prepared the meal, but he needed to prepare them for what was coming. So Jesus celebrated the Passover with his disciples. At this meal, Jesus demonstrated true servanthood by washing his disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). He gave his final teachings to the disciples, informed them...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"32":[{"id":55336,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:32","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","summary_en":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82962,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:32","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","summary_en":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110588,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:32","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","summary_en":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138214,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:32","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:32","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:32<\/strong> Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","summary_en":"8:32 Peter understood what Jesus had said, but he did not accept it. Peter shared the popular idea that the Messiah was to be a victorious national ruler, so he thought Jesus’ talk of suffering and death was nonsense.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65367,"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":92993,"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":120619,"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":148245,"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}],"33":[{"id":30044,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Peter, the Apostle","title_en":"Peter, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PETER, <span>The Apostle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards.<\/p>\n<p>There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “Simon” was not merely the Greek equivalent of “Simeon” but that, having his home in bilingual Galilee, “Simon” was the alternate form he used in dealings with Gentiles. In fact, it was quite common for a cosmopolitan Jew to employ three forms of his name depending on the occasion: Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. The double name “Simon Peter” (or “Simon called Peter”) demonstrates that the second name was a later addition, similar to “Jesus, the Christ.” The number of times that the Aramaic equivalent “Cephas” is used (once in John, four times each in Galatians and 1 Corinthians), as well as its translation into the Greek (not common with proper names), indicates the importance of the secondary name. Both Aramaic and Greek forms mean “the rock,” an obvious indication of Peter’s stature in the early church (see below on Mt 16:18). It is obvious that he was called “Simon” throughout Jesus’ ministry but came to be known as “Peter” more and more in the apostolic age.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>• Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>• Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersBackground\">Peter’s Background<\/p>\n<p>Peter was raised in bilingual Galilee. John 1:44 says that the home of Andrew (his brother) and Peter was Bethsaida, the whereabouts of which is difficult to place archaeologically. The only site about which we know is east of the Jordan in the district called Gaulanitis. Yet John 12:21 places Bethsaida in Galilee; however, it is possible that John is reflecting the popular use of the term “Galilee” rather than the legally correct one. Peter and Andrew had a fishing business centered in Capernaum (Mk 1:21, 29) and perhaps were partners with James and John (Lk 5:10). It is also likely that they intermittently continued in their business while disciples, as indicated in the fishing scene in John 21:1-8.<\/p>\n<p>One difficulty with this is the series of statements saying, “We have left all and followed You” (Mt 19:27; Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The majority of interpreters have given this an absolute sense of “sold” or “left” their business. However, Luke 18:28 occurs in the context of leaving their homes but obviously is not meant in an absolute sense. It seems most likely that the disciples did leave the practice of their fishing businesses to follow Christ, but kept the tools of their trade and returned to their trades when necessary.<\/p>\n<p>They certainly did not abandon their families, as evidenced by Peter, who returned to his home at the end of each tour. The New Testament tells us that Peter was married. In Mark 1:29-31 Jesus heals his mother-in-law, who perhaps was living with Peter. In fact, it is possible that his home became Jesus’ headquarters in Galilee. (Matthew 8:14 may indicate that Jesus dwelt there.) First Corinthians 9:5 says that Peter, along with the other married apostles, often took his wife with him on his missionary journeys. Later tradition speaks of his children (Clement of Alexandria’s <em>Stromateis<\/em> 2.6.52) and says that Peter was present at the martyrdom of his wife (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 3.30.2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersConversionandCall\">Peter’s Conversion and Call<\/p>\n<p>Peter’s brother, Andrew, was a disciple of John the Baptist, according to John 1:35-40. This follows the witness of John in 1:29-34 and is the second stage of John’s discipleship drama in chapter one—i.e., after bearing witness he now sends his own followers to Jesus. Andrew and the unnamed disciple (perhaps Philip as in Jn 1:43 or the “beloved disciple,” whom many identify with John himself) then “follow” Jesus (a term used often in John for discipleship). The next day Andrew follows the Baptist’s example and finds his brother Simon, saying, “We have found the Messiah” (Jn 1:41, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Peter’s conversion is presupposed in John 1:42, where Simon is brought to Jesus by Andrew and there given a new name.<\/p>\n<p>There are three separate episodes in the Gospels in which Simon is called, and these overlap with three episodes in which he is given the name “Cephas” (“Peter,” which means “rock”) by Jesus. John locates the event in Judea where John the Baptist was baptizing. The synoptic Gospels have two different scenes. The first call takes place at the Sea of Galilee (Mk 1:16-20; Mt 4:18-22). Jesus is walking along the shore and sees Peter and Andrew along with James and John casting their nets into the sea. At this time he calls them to become “fishers of men.” Luke then expands this into a fishing scene (Lk 5:1-11), in which the disciples have fished all night and caught nothing but at the command of Jesus lower their nets and catch an amount of fish so great that the boat starts to sink. The episode concludes exactly like the Markan abbreviated form: Jesus says that from now on they will “catch men,” and as a result they leave everything and follow him.<\/p>\n<p>The second synoptic episode involving Peter’s call (and his new name) is the official choice of the Twelve upon the mountain (Mk 3:13-19 and parallels); in the list of the names we have “Simon he surnamed Peter.” The final occurrence dealing with Peter’s new name is found in Matthew 16:17-19, in connection with Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi.<\/p>\n<p>It is somewhat difficult to harmonize these episodes properly. Were there three different episodes in which Simon was called (Jn 1:42; Mk 1:20; 3:16) and three separate incidents in which he was given the name Cephas\/Peter (Jn 1:42; Mk 3:16; Mt 16:18)? It is attractive to a broad spectrum of academia to assume that one single event, which happened at some indeterminate time toward the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, was later expanded into these diverse traditions. However, a closer examination of the Gospel data does not necessitate such a conclusion. John 1:35-42 is not an institutional scene that connotes an official call. Rather, it describes the first encounter with Jesus and realization regarding his significance. The “renaming” is in the future tense and looks to a later event. Moreover, John deliberately omits most of the crisis events in Jesus’ life (the baptism, the choice of the Twelve, the Transfiguration, the words of institution at the Last Supper, Gethsemane) and replaces them with highly theological scenes that teach the spiritual significance of the events. This is what he has done here.<\/p>\n<p>The same is true of the first synoptic call, i.e., the fishing scene. Again, there is no hint of official ordination to office here but rather a proleptic or prophetic hint of future ministry. This is especially true of the highly theological scene in Luke, which promises abundant results. Again in all three accounts the future tense is employed: “I will make you fishers of men” (Matthew and Mark), “You will catch men” (Luke, <span>nkjv<\/span>). The call in Mark 1:20 and Matthew 4:21 and their reaction (leaving all behind and following Jesus) is the opening gambit that is finalized in the actual institutional scene in Mark 3:13-19 and parallels. The wording does not indicate that these two episodes are doublets, for the actual appointment of the disciples occurs in the second passage. We must differentiate between the original call to one segment (who became the so-called “inner circle” of the Twelve) and the final choice of all the disciples.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersPlaceamongtheTwelve\">Peter’s Place among the Twelve<\/p>\n<p>The prominence of Simon Peter in the Gospels and Acts cannot be disputed. While some have attempted to attribute this to his leadership role in the later church, there is no basis for that in the text of the NT. From the very beginning Simon attained preeminence above the others. In the lists of the Twelve just mentioned, Simon’s name always appears first, and in Matthew 10:2 it introduces his name as “the first.” Moreover, the Twelve are often designated “Peter and those with him” (Mk 1:36; Lk 9:32; 8:45, <span>nkjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout the accounts Peter acted and spoke on behalf of the other disciples. At the Transfiguration it is Peter who wanted to erect tents (Mk 9:5), and he alone had sufficient faith to attempt walking on the water (Mt 14:28-31). It is Peter who asks the Lord to explain his teaching on forgiveness (Mt 18:21) and parables (Mt 15:15; Lk 12:41) and who speaks the disciples’ minds in Matthew 19:27, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you; what’s in it for us?” (paraphrased). The collectors of the temple tax come to Peter as leader of the group (Mt 17:24). As a member of the inner circle (with James and John, possibly Andrew in Mk 13:3) he was often alone with Jesus (at the raising of Jairus’s daughter, Mk 5:37 and parallels; at the Transfiguration, Mk 9:2 and parallels; at Gethsemane, Mk 14:33 and Mt 26:37). Jesus asks Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal in Luke 22:8, and in Mark 14:37 (and Mt 26:40) he directs his rebuke to Peter as representing the others (“Could ye not watch with me one hour?”). Finally, the message of the angel at the tomb as recorded in Mark 16:7 said, “Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter.” Certainly Peter held a very special place among the Twelve.<\/p>\n<p>This was especially evident in the Caesarea Philippi episode (Mk 8:27-33 and parallels). It was Peter whose confession became the high point of the Gospel accounts, “Thou art the Christ” (Luke adds “of God”; Matthew, “the Son of the living God”). After Jesus then spoke of the suffering of the Son of Man, Peter rebuked him, and in Mark’s description Jesus then turned, gazed at all the disciples, and said to Peter, “Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men” (v 33, <span>kjv<\/span>). This was obviously directed at them all through Peter.<\/p>\n<p>The portrait of Peter that comes through all four accounts pictures him as impulsive, often rash; he is the first to act and speak his mind and was typified by his enthusiasm for everything in which he had a part. At the sight of Jesus walking on the water, Peter asked that the Lord command him to do the same and then immediately leaped out of the boat and began doing just that. At the Transfiguration, while the others were awed into silence by the appearance of Moses and Elijah, Peter the man of action said, “If thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles” (Mt 17:4, <span>kjv<\/span>). Mark and Luke both add here that Peter did not know what he was saying. Peter’s unguarded and unthinking tendency to protest Jesus’ statements is seen not only at Caesarea Philippi but also at the foot-washing scene in John 13:4-11 when he said first, “You shall never ever wash my feet”; and then after Jesus’ strong retort, “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me,” he reversed himself completely, stating, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and head” (13:8-9, <span>nkjv<\/span>). Finally, in the account of the race to the tomb (Jn 20:2-10), the beloved disciple, reaching the tomb first, paused while Peter immediately and impulsively entered it. Peter was certainly one who “rushed in where angels fear to tread.” However, this very trait aligns him with all of us and may be one of the major reasons why he becomes the representative disciple throughout the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheRock\">Peter the Rock<\/p>\n<p>The key to the significance of Simon Peter is obviously the controversial addendum to the Caesarea Philippi episode, found only in Matthew 16:17-19, Jesus’ testimonial to Peter. There are several crucial aspects of this saying. The most important for this study is verse 18, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church” (<span>kjv<\/span>). There have been many interpretations of this down through history: (1) It refers to Peter as the “rock” or first bishop of the church. This was the Roman Catholic interpretation from the third century on and was employed as a prooftext for apostolic succession, but it is not hinted at anywhere in the context or even in the epistles: it was not a first-century concept. (2) The majority of Protestants since the Reformation have taken this to be a reference to Peter’s statement of faith rather than to Peter himself; but this neglects the wordplay, which is even more pronounced in Aramaic, which has only one form for “Cephas” (rock). (3) An alternative has been to take “this rock” as a reference to Jesus himself, but that is fanciful and is hardly in the context. In conclusion, “this rock” is almost certainly a reference to Peter, but it must be understood in two ways. First, Peter was to become the foundation upon which Christ would build his church, a position clearly attested to in Acts. This does not mean that Peter had an authority above the other apostles. Paul’s rebuke of Peter in Galatians 2:11-14 demonstrates that he was not above them, and at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 it is James who has the position of leadership. Second, Peter is seen here not merely as an individual but as the representative of the disciples. This view is coming to increasing prominence today. It recognized the Jewish concept of “corporate identity” in which the leader was identified with the corporate body (e.g., the king or high priest representing the nation before God). This concept is also in keeping with Matthew 18:18-20, which passes on the same authority to the church as is here given to Peter. In this view Peter as the rock becomes the first of the building blocks upon which Christ, the chief cornerstone (to continue the metaphor), will build his church (see Eph 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>Two other aspects are worthy of note here. First, verse 18 says, “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” The “gates of hell” is a common Jewish euphemism for death’s inevitable and irrevocable power. Jesus is saying that Satan will not be triumphant over the church, and his sphere of operations, death, will be defeated (cf. 1 Cor 15:26, 54-55). The church would undergo persecution and martyrdom, but the church would be triumphant.<\/p>\n<p>Second, verse 19 promises, “I will give unto thee [singular] the keys of the kingdom,” another statement used of apostolic succession by the medieval church. Again, this must be understood in light of corporate identity; Peter, as the preeminent figure in the early church, here embodies the community in his leadership. The “keys of the kingdom” are in direct contrast to the “gates of hell” (cf. Rv 1:18, “the keys of hell and death” and Rv 3:7, the “key of David”), and this follows the imagery of the building seen in the rock upon which Christ will build his church. Here Peter is given the keys that will unlock the power of the kingdom in building God’s community, the church. The future tense (“will give”) undoubtedly points to the postresurrection period, when that power was unleashed and the church erected.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetertheApostle\">Peter the Apostle<\/p>\n<p>Two events led to the new Peter who fills the pages of Acts: his reinstatement described in John 21:15-17 and the resurrection appearance of the Lord, which is never described but alluded to in Luke 24:34 and 1 Corinthians 15:5. His denial was certainly proof that he was not yet able to assume his predicted position as the rock of the church. Both Luke and Paul seem to state that the risen Lord appeared to Simon Peter before the others, which would be fitting in light of his preeminence in the early church. During the Palestinian era, the fifteen-year period prior to the Gentile mission, Peter was the leading figure. The others mentioned in Acts 1–12 are all secondary to Peter, the dominant director of church policy. These include John, who is with Peter in the temple (3:1), the prison (4:13), and Samaria (8:14); Stephen, who was one of the Seven and whose revolutionary preaching led to his martyrdom (chs 6–7); Philip, another of the Seven who proclaimed the gospel in Samaria and to the Ethiopian eunuch (ch 8); Barnabas, who set an example of communal sharing (4:36-37) and was an official delegate to Antioch (11:20-30); Paul, a miraculous convert and witness (9:1-30; 11:25-30; 12:25); and James, who became the first apostolic martyr (12:2). It is Peter who proposes the choice of the 12th disciple (1:15-17), who proclaims the gospel at Pentecost (2:14-40), who utters the healing word (3:6), and who defends the gospel before the Sanhedrin (4:8-12, 19-20; 5:29-32). The episode regarding Ananias and Sapphira is particularly poignant, for here Peter functions as the avenging messenger of God; nowhere is his authority more evident. We would also note his authority in the scene at Samaria concerning the attempt of Simon the Sorcerer to buy the charismatic power (8:18-24). Again, it is Peter whose influence commands the situation. In these two incidents we certainly see the “binding and loosing” jurisdiction (cf. Mt 16:19) exhibited in Peter.<\/p>\n<p>Yet Peter and the church still came under the strictures of their Jewish heritage. The evidence points to a Jewish proselyte self-consciousness on the part of the early church. They viewed themselves as the righteous remnant, living in the age of Messianic fulfillment, but still interpreted themselves in a Jewish sense and conducted their evangelism in the proselyte form of Jewish particularism (i.e., Gentiles could only be converted through Judaism). Two events altered this. First, the Hellenistic Jewish branch of the church rebelled against the Hebrew Christians, which resulted in the appointment of the seven deacons and a change in the orthodox policy of the Palestinian church. Second, this then led to a new preaching ministry, first by Stephen, whose insights ended in his martyrdom and the dispersal of the Hellenistic branch in chapter 8; then by Philip and others, who extended the gospel even further, to the Samaritans and God-fearers. As a further result, Peter and John came to Samaria (8:14), the next significant step toward the Gentile mission. Thus ended the centrality of Jerusalem in the unfolding story.<\/p>\n<p>The two miracles of Peter, at Lydda (the paralytic) and Joppa (raising the dead woman) in Acts 9:32-42, are probably intended to parallel similar miracles of Jesus in Luke’s first work (Lk 5:18-26; 8:49-56). This is part of a major theme in Acts whereby Jesus’ life and ministry are paralleled and continued in the work of the Spirit through the church. Again Peter is seen in a representative role.<\/p>\n<p>The new relationships are extended in two further scenes. First, Peter stays with “Simon, a tanner,” in Joppa, an unclean trade; no pious Jew would knowingly have social contact with such a one. Even more important, God teaches Peter through a dream (10:10-16) that the old dichotomy between clean and unclean has been broken. This then leads Peter to the home of an uncircumcised Gentile, the most serious social taboo for the Jew, and subsequent events force Peter to admit Gentiles into the church without the necessity of Jewish proselyte requirements. The serious consequences of this are seen in the debate that ensued in Jerusalem (Acts 11:2-3) and later at the council (Acts 15:1-21). The centrality of this event is demonstrated in the extent to which Luke reproduces Peter’s speech, which seems to be a repetition of chapter 10 but is meant to highlight this crucial episode. Often forgotten in the significance of this for the early church is the fact that for Luke the Gentile mission begins with Peter, not Paul. He is the one upon whom the salvific act of God descends; and as the leader of the church, he was the first important witness to it.<\/p>\n<p>The persecution of Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-4) was likely due to the furor caused by this free intercourse with Gentiles; and it ended the period of Peter’s leadership in Jerusalem. The Jewish people were greatly offended by the new Christian push; and according to Luke in Acts, the idyllic period of popularity, in which the common people supported the church, effectively ceased at this time. Peter’s miraculous release and the dramatic scene at Mary’s house typified the special place of Peter, but the momentum shifts. Peter is forced to flee Jerusalem, and in the interim James arises to leadership (Acts 12:17); at the Jerusalem council it is the latter who has the chair and presents the council’s decision (Acts 15:6-29).<\/p>\n<p>The exact relationship between Peter and the other disciples, especially with the so-called pillars—James and John—and the apostle Paul, cannot be ascertained. The evidence is too vague. Many have thought that indeed there were no truly universal leaders, for the early church was too diverse. However, that is unlikely, and Luke’s portrayal in Acts parallels Paul’s statement in Galatians 2:8 that Peter was the apostle par excellence to the “circumcised” and Paul to the “Gentiles.” They were the universal leaders, while James became the local leader of the Jerusalem eldership. However, neither Peter nor Paul had dominical status similar to that of later popes (i.e., neither was the absolute spokesman of the church and above criticism). So-called emissaries from James could have such an influence on Peter that he would hypocritically change his behavior before Gentiles (Gal 2:12), and Paul could rebuke Peter publicly for doing so (Gal 2:11-14). Paul never claimed authority over the other disciples and even sought their approval and “the right hands of fellowship” for his ministry to the Gentiles (Gal 2:1-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PetersFutureMinistry\">Peter’s Future Ministry<\/p>\n<p>We have very little hard evidence for Peter’s other movements. It seems as though Peter gradually turned from leadership to missionary work. However, this is an oversimplification. It is most likely that, following the similar pattern of Paul, he combined the two. The presence of a “Cephas party” at Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22) may indicate that Peter had spent some time there. This is made even more likely when Paul uses Peter as the main example for taking one’s wife on missionary expeditions (1 Cor 9:5). The “Cephas party” probably consisted of those who were converted under his ministry; it is probable that they were Jewish Christians and opposed the “Paul party” on Jewish-Gentile debates reflected elsewhere in 1 Corinthians.<\/p>\n<p>The First Epistle of Peter was sent to churches in northern Asia Minor—the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. The problem here is that there is no hint that Peter had been there and no personal notations in the epistle to demonstrate his acquaintance with these churches. However, it does show that he was very interested in them. In fact, some believe that the reason why Paul was not allowed into this district according to Acts 16:7-8 was that Peter was already ministering there. In short, the question of Peter’s involvement in Asia Minor must remain an open one.<\/p>\n<p>There is no final NT evidence that Peter went to Rome. First Peter 5:13 says that the epistle was sent from “Babylon,” and it is doubtful that this was the literal Babylon, because there is no tradition that Peter ever went there, and Babylon was sparsely populated back then. It is probably a cryptic symbol for Rome, the “Babylon of the West.” It is most likely that the “Babylon” of Revelation 14:8 and 16:19 is also a symbol of Rome. This would fit the strong tradition in the early church that indeed Peter did minister there.<\/p>\n<p>There are four early external witnesses concerning Peter’s death. John 21:18 mentions only the martyrdom of Peter but does not give any hint as to the place. First Clement was written at the end of the first century and reports the martyrdom of Peter and Paul among others. While 1 Clement 5:4 testifies only to the fact and not the place of Peter’s martyrdom, a study of two aspects favors Rome—the reference to a “great multitude” of martyrdoms, which best fits the Neronian persecution, and the phrase “glorious example among us,” which shows that the people of Clement’s own church (Rome) were involved. Ignatius’s letter to the Romans (4:3) also testifies generally to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, and again the context favors Rome as the place. He says, “I did not command you as did Peter and Paul,” which shows that they had ministries in Rome. The Ascension of Isaiah 4:2-3, a Jewish Christian work of the same period, speaks of Beliar (probably Nero) who martyrs “one of the Twelve,” almost certainly Peter. Therefore the earliest evidence does not explicitly point to Rome as the place of Peter’s death, but that is the most likely hypothesis.<\/p>\n<p>Definite statements to that effect appear toward the end of the second century. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, in a letter dated c. 170 (preserved in Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.25.8) says that Peter and Paul taught together in Italy. At the end of that century Irenaeus says (in <em>Against Heresies<\/em> 2.1-3) that Peter and Paul preached in Rome, and Tertullian in the same general period adds that Peter was martyred “like . . . the Lord” (<em>Scorpiace<\/em> 15). Clement of Alexandria and Origen both allude to Peter’s presence in Rome, and the latter adds the belief that he was “crucified head-downwards” (Eusebius’s <em>Ecclesiastical History<\/em> 2.15.2; 3.1.2). The tradition that Peter was crucified may be supported in John 21:18: “when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall . . . carry thee wither thou wouldest not” (<span>kjv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (c. 55–57) does not mention Peter tells us that he could not have gone there earlier than that. If 1 Peter was written during the Neronian persecution, as those who hold to Petrine authorship believe, he must have gone there sometime in the late 50s or early 60s. Of course, the extent of his ministry in Rome also cannot be known. Some indeed have posited that he had little or no extensive stay in Rome. The facts, as they can be recovered, point to certain tentative conclusions. Peter did have some type of ministry in Rome, though the extent of it cannot be known. However, it is doubtful, in light of the early testimony to his preaching ministry there, that he was merely passing through Rome when caught in Nero’s pogrom. Therefore he most likely spent the last years of his ministry in Rome and there suffered martyrdom under Nero, perhaps by crucifixion.<\/p>\n<p>Simon Peter, along with Paul, was the leading figure in the early church. His impact has been tragically dimmed by the acrimonious debates of Roman Catholic– Protestant circles, but the biblical evidence is clear. He was the leading disciple of Jesus and indeed the “rock” who provided the foundation for the church. As the representative disciple, his enthusiasm and even his weaknesses have made him the supreme example of the developing disciple, one who, through the power of the risen Lord, rose above his faults to become a towering figure on the church scene.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","summary_en":"PETER, The Apostle One of the 12 disciples; rose to prominence both among the disciples during Jesus’ ministry and among the apostles afterwards. There are actually four forms of Peter’s name in the New Testament: the Hebrew translated into Greek, “Simeon” to “Simon,” and the Aramaic translated into Greek, “Cephas” to “Petros” (meaning “rock”). His given name was Simeon bar-Jonah (Mt 16:17; cf. Jn 1:42), “Simon the son of John,” which was common Semitic nomenclature. It is most likely that “S...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55337,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","summary_en":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82963,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","summary_en":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110589,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","summary_en":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138215,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:33","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:33","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:33<\/strong> Jesus <em>looked at his disciples<\/em> before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • <em>Get away from me, Satan<\/em> does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke <em>from a human point of view, not from God’s<\/em>, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","summary_en":"8:33 Jesus looked at his disciples before he publicly rebuked Peter; he wanted them to understand that Peter was wrong. • Get away from me, Satan does not mean that Peter was demon-possessed. Peter spoke from a human point of view, not from God’s, so he unwittingly spoke for Satan, the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), and repeated Satan’s temptation (cp. Matt 4:8-10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":8207,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Crucifixion","title_en":"Crucifixion","content_ro":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CRUCIFIXION<\/h3>\n<p>Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>• Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>• The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<h5>The Pagan Mode<\/h5>\n<p>Literally, the word “cross” in Greek referred to a pointed stake used for various purposes, including an instrument of execution. It could be an upright stake, used to impale a victim, or a vertical stake with a crossbeam either across the top (T) or across the middle (+), used to hang or crucify a criminal, with the added disgrace of public display. Evidently crucifixion was practiced first by the Medes and Persians and later by Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>), the Carthaginians, and the Romans. Both Greeks and Romans restricted its use to slaves, considering it too barbaric for citizens. In the imperial era the Romans extended the use to foreigners, but even so it was used mainly for crimes against the state.<\/p>\n<p>Crucifixion was universally recognized as the most horrible type of execution. In the East, in fact, it was used only as a further sign of disgrace for prisoners already executed, usually by decapitation. In the West the condemned criminal was scourged (whipped), usually at the place of execution, and forced to carry the crossbeam to the spot where a stake had already been erected. A tablet stating the crime was often placed around the offender’s neck and was fastened to the cross after the execution. The prisoner was commonly tied or sometimes nailed to the crossbeam (with the nails through the wrists, since the bones in the hand could not take the weight). The beam was then raised and fixed to the upright pole. If the executioners wished a particularly slow, agonizing death, they might drive blocks or pins into the stake for a seat or a step to support the feet. Death came about either through loss of blood circulation followed by coronary failure or through the collapse of one’s lungs, causing suffocation. That could take days, so often the victim’s legs would be broken below the knees with a club, causing massive shock and eliminating any further possibility of easing the pressure on the bound or spiked wrists. Usually a body was left on the cross to rot, but in some instances was given to relatives or friends for burial.<\/p>\n<h5>The Jewish Mode<\/h5>\n<p>A different form of crucifixion is seen in the OT. King Saul’s body was decapitated and affixed to a wall by the Philistines (1 Sm 31:9-10). The Persian king Darius made impaling the penalty for altering his decree (Ezr 6:11). According to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, the Eastern form was employed by the Jews with the added proviso that the body must be removed from “the tree” before nightfall, because the victim was “accursed by God” (cf. Gal 3:13) and must not remain to “defile the land.” The Roman form of crucifixion was not employed by the Jews. The only exception was a mass crucifixion of 800 rebels by the Jewish ruler Alexander Janneus in 76 <span>BC<\/span>, reported by the Jewish historian Josephus as being universally condemned by the Jews. Some believe that Jewish courts did practice the Western method of crucifixion after the second century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristsCrucifixion\">Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The NT (quoted in this article from the <span>rsv<\/span>) has much to say about Christ’s crucifixion because it is the central theme of the Christian faith.<\/p>\n<h5>The Predictions<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospels record three predictions by Christ of his own crucifixion (Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34 and parallel passages). In addition, John recorded three sayings about the Son of Man being “lifted up” (Jn 3:14; 8:28; 12:32-33), which parallel the synoptic predictions. Several themes are interwoven into those passages: (1) Christ’s passion (a term used for his suffering on the cross) was part of God’s redemptive purpose (Mk 8:31, “must”). (2) Both Jew and Roman were guilty of “delivering” and of “killing” Jesus. (3) His death would be followed by vindication via the resurrection. (4) His death itself, in a paradoxical way, was seen as a means of his entering into “glory” (seen in the symbolism John attached to “lifted up”). Other sayings that hint at Jesus’ fate are his comment about the murder of the prophets (Mt 23:29-30; Lk 13:33), his parables about the death of the prophets and the “son” (the marriage feast, Mt 22:1-14; the wicked tenants, Mk 12:1-10), and his teachings about the coming similar suffering of his disciples (Mt 10:24-28; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 15:18-25).<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Event<\/h5>\n<p>The crucifixion of Jesus combined Roman and Jewish elements. Although the Gospel writers stressed Jewish guilt for their own polemical purposes, they were careful to distinguish between the leaders and the common people. It was the leaders who initiated Jesus’ arrest (Mk 14:43) and his trial by the Sanhedrin (vv 53-64). Though Pilate seemed to vacillate and in the end surrendered weakly to the crowds by “washing his hands” of any guilt (Mt 27:24), Rome was clearly implicated in the Crucifixion. Since the Sanhedrin did not have the power to inflict capital punishment, Pilate’s decision was necessary before crucifixion could occur. Further, Romans actually carried out the execution.<\/p>\n<p>At Jesus’ crucifixion Roman custom was observed in his scourging, his mock enthronement and stripping, the bearing of his own crossbeam, his being nailed to the cross, and the breaking of the two thieves’ legs. The elevated site fits the custom of displaying certain criminals publicly. So does the height of Jesus’ cross, probably seven to nine feet (2 to 3 meters). The presence of a tablet bearing the inscription “The King of the Jews” on the cross suggests that the crossbeam was fixed somewhere below the top of the stake. Jewish elements are seen in the wine mixed with myrrh (Mk 15:23), the vinegar on the hyssop reed (v 36), and the removal of the body before sunset and the beginning of the Sabbath (Jn 19:31).<\/p>\n<p>Although the fact of Jesus’ crucifixion is seldom challenged historically, the varying details in the four Gospels are sometimes regarded as later additions due to the influence of prophetic “fulfillment,” to Christian-Jewish polemics or to cultic considerations. However, one cannot conclude from the differences in the Gospel accounts that the details are not historical. Narrative selectivity on the part of the Gospel writers is in no sense evidence of fabrication.<\/p>\n<h5>The Emphasis in Each Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The elements found in the individual passion narratives were selected by each writer to present a particular view of the crucifixion scene. It has been realized for some time that the Gospel writers were not only historians but also theologians, selecting scenes and portraying them to show the significance of the events for the Christian faith. Their selection is poignantly evident in the crucifixion narratives.<\/p>\n<p>Mark and Matthew both show the horror of the Messiah being put to death by human beings. The first half of Mark’s scene contrasts the taunts of the crowd with the true significance of Jesus’ death. The twofold “save yourself” (Mk 15:29-31) repeats Jesus’ words about rebuilding the temple in three days—prophetically pointing to the resurrection. The second half of Mark’s description stresses the horror of the scene, progressing from a darkness motif to the cry of abandonment to further taunts (vv 33-36).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of Matthew extends Mark’s imagery in certain important directions, adding that Jesus refused the stupefying drink (a drugged wine to alleviate pain) “when he tasted it” (Mt 27:34), as well as adding “yielded up his spirit” to the death scene (v 50). Matthew thus emphasizes that Jesus voluntarily faced his death fully conscious and in complete control of himself. Matthew’s irony and allusion also bring out the disparity between Jesus’ suffering and his vindication. Elements of vindication include the ripping of the temple veil (v 51) and the centurion’s testimony (v 54). In the remarkable supernatural scene of Matthew 27:52-53, Jesus’ death is followed immediately by an earthquake that opened tombs and revived “many bodies of the saints” who had died. For Matthew those events and others inaugurated the last days, the new age of salvation, when the power of death is broken and life is made available for all.<\/p>\n<p>The account in Luke’s Gospel is also quite remarkable. It has two major thrusts. First, Jesus is portrayed as the perfect example of the righteous martyr who forgives his enemies and by his attitude converts some of his opponents. The taunts of the rulers and soldiers are reversed when the crowd returns home “beating their breasts” (Lk 23:48) and the centurion cries, “Certainly this man was innocent!” (v 47). Second, in Luke the entire setting has an atmosphere of reverence and worship. Omitted are the wine and myrrh, the cry of abandonment, and the Elijah taunt. Other episodes are noted instead—in particular, the prayers of Jesus. In Luke alone are related (1) Jesus’ prayer that God forgive his executioners, placing it in contrast with the soldiers’ mockery; (2) the promise in answer to the prayer of the “believing” criminal; and (3) the commitment of Jesus’ spirit to the Father. Luke’s presentation makes the Crucifixion a kind of worshipful commemoration.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel of John also one finds a change of theological focus. It goes further than Luke in removing shocking details such as the darkness and the taunts. Calm pervades throughout. Stress is laid on Jesus’ sovereign control of his situation, as the Crucifixion virtually becomes a coronation procession. John alone states that the inscription on the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—the charge thus becomes a worldwide proclamation of Christ’s enthronement. The inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” continues Pilate’s dialogue on kingship beyond Jesus’ trial. John thus adds to Matthew’s emphasis: Jesus has not only become king but has been sovereign all along. The king is pictured as performing the priestly function and himself becoming the sacrifice. John alone mentions the hyssop (which had been used to sprinkle the blood of the lamb at the Passover, Ex 12:22) and Jesus’ cry, “It is finished” (Jn 19:29-30). Further, the piercing of Jesus’ side (vv 31-37), which shows the reality of his death, may also be seen symbolically, along with the “rivers of living water” (7:37-38), as typifying the outpouring of life in the new age.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, each Gospel pictures the meaning of Jesus’ death from a different vantage point. To combine their pictures gives new understanding of the significance of the cross. Rather than contradiction, one sees separate parts of a compelling whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTheologicalSignificanceofChristsCrucifixion\">The Theological Significance of Christ’s Crucifixion<\/p>\n<p>The cross plays a dual role in Christian theology. Some theologians emphasize the significance of the historical crucifixion of Jesus Christ and what it accomplished for the believer. Others focus on the symbolism of the cross in each believer’s life.<\/p>\n<p>The death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth are the central events of Christian theology. The cross has meaning because of the significance of the person who was put to death on it and because of what his death accomplished. “The word of the cross” was central in the salvation proclamation of the early church. Above all, the event of the cross was God’s principal saving act in history; hence the cross, though a past event, has present significance. Christ crucified and risen is the core of the church’s message (Gal 3:1).<\/p>\n<p>The central passage is 1 Corinthians 1:17–2:5. There the “word of the cross” (1:18) is contrasted with “eloquent wisdom” (v 17). Sounding like foolishness, it is offensive to both Greek philosophy and Jewish legalism (cf. Gal 6:12-15), but that very “weakness” in human eyes opens the door for the “power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). The cross in the church’s <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kerygma<\/span> (proclamation) illustrates the pattern of God’s action: he forges out of the debilitated things of life both power and wisdom (vv 26-30). Because philosophical speculation replaces God’s message with human wisdom and thus empties the cross of its significance, Paul rejected “lofty words” and preached only the “crucified Christ.” The “Holy Spirit’s power” thus became evident in Paul’s “weakness” (2:1-5). The central core of the gospel is God’s demonstration of victory emerging from seeming defeat, of power arising out of infirmity.<\/p>\n<p>The cross as the basis of atonement is the principal emphasis in the Epistles (see Eph 2:16; Col 1:20; 2:14), whereas in the book of Acts the resurrection seems more central (see Acts 2:33-36; 3:19-26; 13:37-39). The reason for the different emphasis is found in the different purposes of those writings: the cross tends to be used in didactic (instructional) sections, the resurrection in apologetic (persuasive) or kerygmatic sections, when the basis for salvation is being presented. In actuality they were a single event in salvation history. Jesus “was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom 4:25).<\/p>\n<p>Paul expressed the significance of the cross in the words “redemption,” “propitiation,” and “justification.” The first two concepts have the “for us” theme traceable to the suffering servant (Is 53:10-12), whose death was for “the sin of many.” The idea of redemption in both Testaments is the payment of a price to “ransom” those held captive. That price, the NT explains, was paid on the cross, and humanity was thereby freed from sin (Mk 10:45; Ti 2:14; 1 Pt 1:18). The connection between Jesus’ death and the substitutionary preposition “instead of” is also seen in Galatians 3:13, which adds to the curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 the interpretation “for us” (cf. Rom 5:10-11, 18; 1 Cor 11:24; Eph 1:7; 2:13). Similarly, Paul’s concept of justification centers on the cross. It is “Christ crucified” who declares humanity righteous and makes freedom from sin possible (Rom 6:6; Gal 2:19-21). Human guilt was transferred to the cross and expiated there, opening up God’s forensic (legal) forgiveness of all who avail themselves of its power (1 Pt 1:18-21; 2:24; 3:18). Finally, the result is “reconciliation”—both vertically, between humans and God (Col 1:20), and horizontally, between previously opposed human forces (e.g., in Eph 2:13-16, between Jew and Gentile).<\/p>\n<p>Beyond the theological meaning of the literal cross on which Jesus Christ was put to death in Judea nearly 2,000 years ago is the symbolic significance of the cross for his followers today.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus made “bearing the cross” a condition of discipleship in five passages. There are two major variants: one, found in the material common to Matthew and Luke (Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27), is phrased negatively (“cannot be my disciple”); the other, which is found in all three synoptic Gospels (Mt 16:24; Mk 8:34; Luke 9:23), is phrased positively (“If anyone would come after me”). Two major motifs are found in the sayings. The major motif comes from the imagery of a condemned man carrying his cross to an execution site; a necessary part of discipleship is a daily (Lk 9:23) willingness to sacrifice all and to suffer for the sake of Christ. The central point is not death but disgrace; the disciple must be ready to become an outcast from society.<\/p>\n<p>Paul extended Christ’s metaphor to the death of self. He may have taken the idea from the early catechism, as seen in the baptismal creed of Romans 6:1-8, which identifies baptism as being “buried with him.” Paul interpreted the Christian’s identification with Christ’s death to mean that “our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin” (Rom 6:6). As further developed in 2 Corinthians 5:14-17, the believer participates in the death and resurrection of Christ, so that the old life has passed away and the new has come (5:17). The same view is found also in Galatians, which contrasts the mystical death of self to the legalistic system of the Judaizers. The believer is “crucified with Christ,” with the result that “it is no longer I who live” (Gal 2:20); “the flesh with its passions and desires” is “crucified” (5:24); and “far be it from me to glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (6:14). Believers must experience the cross before they can find the resurrection life.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Criminal Law and Punishment; Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani; Golgotha; Redeemer, Redemption; Seven Last Sayings of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","summary_en":"CRUCIFIXION Form of execution employed in the death of Jesus Christ. Two concepts related to crucifixion occur in Scripture: the “cross,” a pagan mode of capital punishment, and the “tree,” which was a Jewish form. Jesus’ crucifixion was the means by which he procured atonement for humanity. The term “cross” was also used figuratively by Jesus to portray the sacrifice required in discipleship, and it was used by the apostle Paul to symbolize the death of self in the process of transformation....","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14569,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55338,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","summary_en":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82964,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","summary_en":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110590,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","summary_en":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138216,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:34","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:34-38<\/strong> Jesus’ invitation to <em>his disciples<\/em> and <em>the crowd<\/em> lays out the cost of being his <em>follower<\/em>. • To <em>give up your own way<\/em> involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To <em>take up your cross<\/em> is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To <em>follow<\/em> Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","summary_en":"8:34-38 Jesus’ invitation to his disciples and the crowd lays out the cost of being his follower. • To give up your own way involves letting Jesus determine your goals and purposes in life. To take up your cross is metaphorical (cp. Luke 9:23); it indicates that faithfulness to Jesus must extend, if required, even to the point of death. To follow Jesus’ teaching and example is a continual commitment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60166,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardship in Following God","title_en":"Hardship in Following God","content_ro":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","summary_en":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65472,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66958,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Belonging to Christ","title_en":"Belonging to Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","summary_en":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66992,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Giving up Rights","title_en":"Giving up Rights","content_ro":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","summary_en":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87792,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardship in Following God","title_en":"Hardship in Following God","content_ro":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","summary_en":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93098,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94584,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Belonging to Christ","title_en":"Belonging to Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","summary_en":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94618,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Giving up Rights","title_en":"Giving up Rights","content_ro":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","summary_en":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115418,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardship in Following God","title_en":"Hardship in Following God","content_ro":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","summary_en":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120724,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122210,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Belonging to Christ","title_en":"Belonging to Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","summary_en":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122244,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Giving up Rights","title_en":"Giving up Rights","content_ro":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","summary_en":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143044,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Hardship in Following God","title_en":"Hardship in Following God","content_ro":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Hardship in Following God<\/h3>\n<p>Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34).<\/p>\n<p>Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrews was purely strategic. He worried that this growing sector of the population would cause trouble for him (Exod 1:8-22). In chapter 5, the situation is different. Moses and Aaron had rallied the people’s hopes that their God would soon rescue them (4:29-31). During their initial encounter with Pharaoh, Moses and Aaron confronted him with the reality of God’s sovereign rule (5:1-3). Not surprisingly, Pharaoh considered this an affront to his own sovereignty and reacted strongly against the Israelites (5:4-21).<\/p>\n<p>When God’s Kingdom clashes with God’s enemies, there is often conflict and hardship for God’s people. We should not be surprised. Believers have changed allegiance from the realm of darkness to the realm of light (Col 1:11-14), and those who rule in the realm of darkness will certainly not let us leave their power without a fight. We must stand firm in our faith, knowing that God will secure the final victory on our behalf (Exod 6:1-8; see also Matt 5:11-12; John 16:33; Rom 16:20; Eph 6:10-18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 39:6-20; Exod 5:1-23; 18:8; 1 Kgs 18:3-4; 19:1-10; Pss 6:6-7; 22:11-18; Matt 5:11-12; Mark 8:34; John 15:20; 16:33; Rom 16:20; 2 Cor 11:23-29; Eph 6:10-18; 2 Tim 3:12; Heb 10:32-36; 1 Pet 1:6-7; 3:9-17; 4:12-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","summary_en":"Hardship in Following God Sometimes people are urged to accept Christ because “he will solve your problems.” But Christ did not promise to solve all of people’s problems. In fact, he repeatedly warned people to consider what it would cost to follow him (see, e.g., Luke 14:28), and he pointed out the hardships that would come into their lives as a result of choosing to follow him (see, e.g., Mark 8:34). Exodus 5 gives us a case study: Pharaoh’s earlier enslavement and persecution of the Hebrew...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148350,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149836,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Belonging to Christ","title_en":"Belonging to Christ","content_ro":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Belonging to Christ<\/h3>\n<p>To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if they have that spiritual gift (1 Cor 7:7).<\/p>\n<p>What lies behind such an apparently extreme view of life? For Paul, it is the awareness that believers are claimed by Christ and so belong to him, body and soul. When Christ died, he bought them for himself (6:20). They must no longer live simply for themselves and their own desires (2 Cor 5:14-15). Having died to their own personal interests, they are called to live entirely for their Lord (Rom 14:7-9).<\/p>\n<p>For true Christians, obedience to Christ is not an onerous burden, but a way to express their love and loyalty to the one who died for them. For the people of Christ, the whole of life is to be a joyful expression of thanks for the grace God has shown them in Jesus Christ. They gladly yield their lives to serve the one who gave up everything for them (see 1 Jn 3:16). By dying to themselves, believers make it possible for Christ to live in and through them (Gal 2:19-20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 9:26, 29; 32:9; 1 Kgs 8:53; Pss 2:8; 28:9; Ezek 18:4; Mark 8:34-36; 12:30; Rom 14:7-9; 1 Cor 6:19-20; 7:20-24; 7:32-35; 2 Cor 5:14-15; Gal 2:19-20; 1 Pet 2:9-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","summary_en":"Belonging to Christ To many modern readers, the New Testament seems to portray an extreme view of the Christian life. Believers are called to forfeit their rights, suffer, and even die for the sake of Christ (Mark 8:34-36). They are to turn away from the things of the world that everybody else lives for (1 Jn 2:15-17) and even to despise their life in this world (John 12:24-25). Paul encourages believers to give up the normal desires for marriage and family and remain single for Christ, if th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149870,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Giving up Rights","title_en":"Giving up Rights","content_ro":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Giving Up Rights<\/h3>\n<p>Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Paul, like Jesus, sees loving others as one of the most important principles in life (Rom 13:8-10; 1 Cor 13:1-13; Gal 5:6; see Matt 5:43-44; 22:36-39). Real Christian love is always sacrificial (1 Cor 13:4-7), like Christ’s own love. Believers ought never to focus on what is best for themselves, but on what is best for others (1 Cor 10:32-33). The sacrificial death of Christ for sinners is the model that reveals the nature of true love (Rom 5:6-8; 15:1-5; 1 Jn 4:9-12). The whole of a believer’s life is to be an expression of Christ’s sacrificial love. This will never be easy, for it means people must consider themselves dead to their own desires (see Mark 8:34-35).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:38-48; 16:24-27; 22:37-39; Rom 5:6-8; 13:8-10; 14:15-22; 15:1-5; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 9:1-23; 10:23-24, 31-33; 13:4-7; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:3-4; 2 Tim 2:9-13; Heb 11:24-26; 1 Jn 4:9-12<\/p>","summary_ro":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","summary_en":"Giving Up Rights Paul nowhere tells believers that they should defend their rights. On the contrary, he emphasizes that believers must always be willing to give up their rights for the sake of others. Believers are free from many of the rules that others feel bound by, but they must always be ready to give up their freedoms if their actions would cause someone else to sin (Rom 14:13-23; 1 Cor 8:1-13; 10:23-33). Defending one’s own personal rights is of little value to Paul. Paul, like Jesus, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":14529,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":23215,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Life","title_en":"Life","content_ro":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LIFE<\/h3>\n<p>In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLivingFather\">The Living Father<\/p>\n<p>God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20).<\/p>\n<p>The sign of life is movement; man is a “lively,” animated body (Mt 27:50; Lk 8:55). Animals also have this animating “breath-soul” (Hebrew of Gn 1:24; 6:17). Thus, all nature is instilled with life deriving from God (Acts 17:24-28). Life is therefore sacred, but unfortunately it is as transient as grass, clouds, dew, shadow (1 Chr 29:15; Jb 7:6, 9; Jas 4:13-16; 1 Pt 1:24). Long life is desired (Gn 35:29); any life is preferable to death and of infinite value (Eccl 9:4-6; Mt 6:25; 16:26), for Sheol houses a ghostly “nonliving life,” bereft of feeling, hope, or divine help (Ps 88:3-12). One’s life can be enhanced by loving and serving God (Dt 30:15-20; 1 Pt 3:8-12), by experiencing God’s deliverance (Is 38:16), and by receiving divine blessings (Mt 5:3-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristasLife\">Christ as Life<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word for “life” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>.<\/em> In classical Greek this word was used for life in general. There are a few examples of this meaning in the New Testament (see Acts 17:25; Jas 4:14: Rv 16:3), but in all other instances the word was used to designate the divine, eternal life—the life of God (Eph 4:18). This life resided in Christ, and he made it available to all who believe in him. Human beings are born with the natural life—called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> in Greek (translated “soul,” “personality,” or “life”); they do not possess the eternal life. This life can be received only by believing in the one who possesses the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">zoe<\/span><em>-life,<\/em> namely, Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The overflowing, vibrant quality of life made available in Christ was evident in the authority of his speech and the power of his touch (Mt 9:18; Mk 1:27, 41-42; 5:27-29). He is “the author of life” (Acts 3:15), who provides the way into life (Mt 7:14; 25:46; Mk 8:35-37; 9:42-47). And he raised the dead with his life-giving power. His own resurrection made him “a life-giving spirit,” with the power of “an indestructible life” (Rom 8:2; 1 Cor 15:45; Heb 7:16). Thus, Jesus Christ is “our life” (Col 3:4)—in union with whom we find “newness of life” (Rom 6:4) and are newly created, living henceforth not for ourselves but for him (2 Cor 5:15-17).<\/p>\n<p>John, especially, dwells on the theme that Christ is the source of this new life (Jn 3:14-16; 5:21) for the children of God (1:12; 3:3, 5). This life is enjoyed already by those who know God and Christ (5:24; 17:3; 1 Jn 5:11-12), for they have already passed from death into eternal life (Jn 10:28; 11:26). Such life is abundant (10:10), enlightened (8:12), free and satisfied (10:9), victorious (Rom 6:6-14), full of peace and joy (Rom 5:1-11), inexhaustibly refreshed (Jn 4:13-14; 7:37-38) and immortal (Jn 5:24; 1 Cor 15:51-57).<\/p>\n<p>All this is possible because from the beginning “all that came to be was alive with his life” (Jn 1:4, <span>neb<\/span>). Thus, the life within the Father flows into the world through the Son, who also “has life in himself” and gives it to whom he will (5:26). He is “the resurrection and the life” (11:25; 14:6) and demonstrates it by restoring life to paralyzed limbs, raising the dead, and conquering death (5:5-9; 11:43; ch 20). People remain in death only because they will not “come” and “have life” (5:40; cf. 1 Jn 3:14).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Eternal Life.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","summary_en":"LIFE In biblical perspective, life flows from the living Father through the Son (his agent in creation and redemption) into a world thirsting for “real” life (see Jn 6:57). The Living Father God the Father is above all else “the living God” (Jer 10:10; Jn 5:26). God, the source of all life (1 Tm 6:13), “inbreathed” humans at creation and sustains them continually (Jb 34:14-15). God alone gives life (Gn 17:16) and takes it away (Gn 3:22-24; 6:3; Ps 104:29; Lk 12:20). The sign of life is moveme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55339,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:35","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","summary_en":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82965,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:35","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","summary_en":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110591,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:35","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","summary_en":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138217,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:35","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:35<\/strong> <em>If you try to hang on<\/em> to (literally <em>save<\/em>) <em>your life<\/em> by keeping it from Jesus, <em>you will lose it<\/em> in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the <em>Good News<\/em>), <em>you will save it<\/em> forever.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","summary_en":"8:35 If you try to hang on to (literally save) your life by keeping it from Jesus, you will lose it in the next world. But if you lose it to Jesus and his cause (the spread of the Good News), you will save it forever.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65509,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93135,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120761,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148387,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"36":[{"id":19676,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","title_en":"Teachings of Jesus Christ","content_ro":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of<\/h3>\n<p>Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? What did he mean when he spoke about the kingdom? What light does his teaching throw on the meaning of his death? What did he say about the Holy Spirit? How did he describe human beings and their needs? Did he anticipate the Christian church? Did he teach anything about the end of the world? What were the main features of his moral teaching? The following sections will seek to answer these important questions.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>• Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutGod\">Teachings about God<\/p>\n<p>Anyone who comes to the teachings of Jesus after reading the OT will at once recognize that much of his teaching about God is the same. Since Jesus, as all orthodox Jews of his day, accepted the testimony of the OT as inspired, it is not surprising that his approach to God was similar. This is especially true of his assumption that God was Creator. He taught a special providential care over the created order and affirmed that God watched over such small creatures as the sparrow (Mt 10:29). There is no support in the teachings of Jesus for the view that God is uninterested in the world he made.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic titles Jesus used for God was Father. This was not new, for the idea occurs in the OT, where God is seen as Father of his people Israel. This kind of fatherhood was national rather than personal. In the intertestamental period the Jews came to regard God as so holy that he was removed from direct contact with human affairs. There had to be mediators between God and people. This exalted notion of God was not conducive to the idea of God as Father, and it is against this background that the uniqueness of the personal fatherhood of God in the teaching of Jesus must be seen. There is some evidence in Judaism that prayer to God as “Our Father” was known, but what distinguishes Jesus’ teachings from that of his contemporaries is that the fatherhood of God was central to what he taught.<\/p>\n<p>The father-son relationship is particularly vivid in John’s Gospel, where Jesus as Son is seen to be in close communion with God as Father. This comes out strongly in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 and in the frequent assertions that the Father had sent the Son and that the Son was doing the will of the Father. It is this strong relationship between God and Jesus in terms of fatherhood and sonship that led Jesus to teach men to approach God in the same way. The Lord’s Prayer at once recognizes this in its opening words. It is particularly important to note that “Our Father” precedes “hallowed be thy name,” for the more intimate idea prepares the way for the more remote. Jesus never taught men to approach God with terror.<\/p>\n<p>Although there is a connection between the way in which Jesus addressed God as Father and the way in which he taught his disciples to approach God, there is also a distinction. Jesus spoke of “my Father and your Father” when he appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection (Jn 20:17), but he did not say “our Father.” His sonship was unique, for he claimed that he and the Father were one (Jn 10:30).<\/p>\n<p>In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus assured his followers that their heavenly Father knows about their needs (Mt 6:32; Lk 12:30), on the strength of which they are exhorted not to be anxious. This gives some insight into the way in which Jesus’ teachings about God has a bearing on practical issues.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHimself\">Teachings about Himself<\/p>\n<p>What Jesus said about himself is of great importance, for this undoubtedly formed the basis of what the early church came to teach about him.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used certain titles of himself or accepted them as descriptions of himself when they were used by others. The most widely used is Son of Man. This title was used by Jesus to refer to himself but was not used by anyone else. It was used, moreover, in several different kinds of sayings. Sometimes the sayings related directly to the public ministry of Jesus, like the saying that the Son of Man was Lord of the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), or that the Son of Man had authority to forgive sins (v 10). Sometimes the sayings had a direct bearing on the Passion, as when Jesus said that the Son of Man must suffer many things (Mk 8:31; note that Mt 16:21 has “he” instead of “Son of Man”). At other times the reference is to a future appearance, as when Jesus declared to the high priest that he would see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven (Mk 14:62). What did Jesus mean by the title, and why did he use it?<\/p>\n<p>The title “Son of Man” had been used before. The phrase occurs in Psalm 8:4, where it refers to man or humans. Again, the expression is used many times in Ezekiel as a mode of address to the prophet, but here also it means man. A rather different use occurs in Daniel 7:13, where one like a son of man comes with the clouds before the Ancient of Days. There is a strong similarity between this passage and the words of Jesus in Mark 14:62. But an important difference is that whereas Son of Man becomes a title in Mark, it is not so in Daniel. There is some evidence for the title in Jewish apocalyptic literature (e.g., in the Similitudes of Enoch), where it represents a preexistent being who will come to judge and overthrow the enemies of God. It seems evident from this that Jesus’ use of Son of Man as a title is unique.<\/p>\n<p>The Son of Man sayings are distributed throughout the four Gospels, and there are no appreciable differences in their uses. What is at first astonishing is that though the title is so widespread in the Gospels on the lips of Jesus, it never became a name by which Jesus was known by the early Christians. In fact, only in Acts 7:56 does the title appear, in this case used by Stephen. It is clear, therefore, that it had a special meaning for Jesus that it did not have for others. There is no doubt that he was referring to himself and not to someone else, as a careful study of all the Son of Man sayings shows. Those who think that Jesus was referring to someone else arrive at this conclusion only after first dispensing with some of the sayings. The most probable reason why he used the title Son of Man was because he wanted to avoid a term like Messiah, which carried with it too many political overtones. But what did Son of Man mean to Jesus? It is rich with the idea of humanness, possibly allusions to Daniel’s “son of man,” and perhaps a touch of the Suffering Servant idea from Isaiah 53. It is most likely that Jesus saw it in terms of his mission in a way that his hearers could not fully appreciate. It is also probable that the early church preferred Messiah because this title carried the meaning of a royal deliverer; also, after the death of Jesus, there would be no further fear of political misunderstanding.<\/p>\n<p>The term Messiah, or Christ, does not belong strictly to the teachings of Jesus, since he himself never used it. The most striking instance where he accepted the ascription of Messiah was in Peter’s confession at Caesarea Philippi. All the synoptic Gospels record the confession “You are the Christ,” while Matthew adds the significant comment by Jesus that flesh and blood had not revealed it but “my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17). He certainly accepted the confession and regarded it as revelation. One other case in the Synoptics where he does not specifically refute messiahship is his answer to the high priest’s question “Are you the Messiah?” (Mk 14:61). In John’s Gospel, Andrew tells Peter that he had found the Messiah (Jn 1:41); the woman at Samaria talks to Jesus, and he reveals that he is the Messiah (4:25-26). There was a widespread expectation among the Jews that a deliverer would come to overthrow their political enemies, the Romans. There were various ideas about his origin (a military leader or a heavenly warrior) and his methods (the Zealots believed that deliverance could come only through armed revolution). The reticence of Jesus concerning messiahship is therefore readily understandable.<\/p>\n<p>Another title of utmost importance is Son of God, although it occurs mainly in John’s Gospel. That both Mark and John regarded Jesus in this light is clear from explicit statements in their Gospels (cf. Mk 1:1; Jn 20:30-31). There are certainly passages where Messiah is linked with Son of God and where Jesus rejects neither title (cf. Mt 16:16). But in the teachings of Jesus one passage makes abundantly clear the special relationship that Jesus had with God as Son—namely, Matthew 11:27 (also Lk 10:22, a parallel passage), where Jesus implies that he is the Son of the Father.<\/p>\n<p>Many similar passages in John’s Gospel are, however, more explicit. The Son is unquestionably preexistent, because he knows he came from the Father and returns to the Father. It is not possible from the many references to sonship in John’s Gospel to come to any other conclusion than that Jesus regarded himself as divine. It is particularly important to note that it is also in this Gospel that Jesus is portrayed most clearly in his human nature with its attendant weaknesses. Nowhere in the teachings of Jesus did he explain how God could become man, but he assumed this as a fact. He taught with the authority of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheKingdomofGod\">Teachings about the Kingdom of God<\/p>\n<p>No one can read the synoptic Gospels without being impressed with the frequency with which the expression “kingdom of God” (or of heaven) occurs. It was clearly an important theme in the whole teaching of Jesus. It is less evident in John’s Gospel but is nevertheless still present. Many of the parables of Jesus are specifically called parables of the kingdom. Jesus’ concept of the kingdom provided a foundational idea to the Christian gospel.<\/p>\n<p>The main idea is the rule of God over people rather than a realm that belongs to God. In other words, the emphasis is on the active reigning of the King. This is important because it means that the kingdom is inextricably affected by relationships between the members and the King. It also means the kingdom will not be expressed in institutional terms.<\/p>\n<p>There is one problem with the kingdom teachings that must be faced: its timing. Some sayings imply that it is already present, while others suggest that it will not come until the future. Some scholars disavow the idea that present and future can be held together; therefore, they reject one and concentrate on the other. Those who maintain a present understanding of the kingdom developed the idea of a social gospel, since Christianity was defined as the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth. According to this view, there is no place for a future arrival of the kingdom. On the other hand, some have denied altogether the present aspect and concentrate on the future. In this case, it is difficult to see in what sense the kingdom teachings are relevant.<\/p>\n<p>Yet others have insisted that since both present and future aspects are found in the Gospel records, no explanation is satisfying that denies one at the expense of the other. One possible solution is to regard the present aspects as applying to this age but as not reaching their fulfillment until the future establishment of the kingdom. A similar solution, expressed differently, is to maintain that the reality is a future kingdom but that it has spilled over into the present. Jesus intentionally included both present and future aspects.<\/p>\n<p>That the kingdom was a theme of common interest is clear from Luke 17:20-21, where the Pharisees asked Jesus when it was coming. His answer, that it was among them, shows unmistakably a present idea. This is equally true of the statement that in the exorcism of evil spirits the kingdom had arrived (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20). Moreover, Jesus mentioned that the kingdom has been forcefully advancing (Mt 11:12), by which he did not mean by revolutionary methods, although he clearly implied that something dynamic was already happening. This idea of dynamic power is one of the most characteristic features of the kingdom. Jesus spoke of binding the strong, armed man (Lk 11:21-22), which shows that in his ministry he expected to give a powerful demonstration against the forces of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the kingdom Jesus proclaimed was a kingdom in which God was supreme. It was inseparably linked with his redemptive mission, in which God was bringing spiritual deliverance to his people. Moreover, the kingdom teachings of Jesus cannot be regarded in isolation. It is part of the total message; no part of that message can be divorced from any other part without distorting the whole.<\/p>\n<p>The clearest teachings on the future aspect of the kingdom are to be found in some of the parables (Mt 13) and in the discourse on the Mt of Olives (Mt 24–25; Mk 13; Lk 21). In the latter, Jesus spoke of the future using imagery drawn from Jewish literature, like the references to clouds, to glory, and to angels in relation to the coming of the Son of Man (Mk 13:26-27). In Matthew’s account there is reference to a trumpet call, another familiar feature (Mt 24:31).<\/p>\n<p>Various features from the kingdom parables give the clearest idea of the nature of the kingdom. Membership in the kingdom is not considered to be universal, for in the parable of the sower not all the soils are productive. The same separation is seen in the parable of the tares and the parable of the dragnet. The tares are destroyed and only the wheat is harvested, while the bad fish are discarded. The members of the kingdom are those who hear and understand the word of the kingdom (Mt 13:23). It is clear, therefore, that a response is necessary if the benefits of the kingdom are to be enjoyed.<\/p>\n<p>There is an emphasis on growth in the parable of the mustard seed, where rapid development occurs from small beginnings. The parables of the treasure and the pearl are intended to underline the value of the kingdom. The universal character of the kingdom comes out sharply in the parable of the vineyard, where the kingdom is said to be taken away from the Jews and given to another “nation,” presumably an allusion to the Gentiles (Mt 21:43). This is in line with the great commission Jesus gave to his disciples to preach to all nations (28:19). A universal kingdom would certainly be entirely different from the messianic kingdom idea of Judaism, in which Israel was to be the central unit. It is not easy to appreciate how revolutionary the idea was of a worldwide kingdom with Gentiles and Jews on the same footing.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHisOwnDeath\">Teachings about His Own Death<\/p>\n<p>The announcement of the kingdom must be linked with Jesus’ approach to his own death. Did Jesus see his death as an integral part of his mission? Some have maintained that he ended his life in disillusionment, but a brief survey of his teaching about his own destiny is sufficient to dispel such a theory. To the further question, “What meaning did Jesus attach to his forthcoming death?” he gave a series of passing indications that, when taken together, supply us with a basis on which to reconstruct some idea of the place of his death within the entire range of his mission.<\/p>\n<p>It is important to note that many times Jesus showed his awareness that details of his life were a fulfillment of Scripture (cf. Mt 26:24, 56; Mk 9:12; Lk 18:31; 24:25-27, 44-45). In all the instances cited, the suffering of Jesus is referred to as the subject of OT prophecy. This must mean that he had reflected on OT predictions and recognized that they could be fulfilled only through his own sufferings. In this case the Passion must be regarded as an indispensable part of Jesus’ consciousness of his own mission.<\/p>\n<p>This emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture is also seen in John’s Gospel. His statement that the Son of Man must be lifted up even as Moses lifted up the serpent (Jn 3:14) illustrates this point. Most of the passages where fulfillment of Scripture is mentioned are the comments of the Evangelist, John. But there can be no doubt that the fulfillment motive played a vital part both in Jesus’ own understanding of his mission and in the early Christians’ understanding of his death. In this connection, some hold that John puts more stress on the Incarnation as a means of salvation in that he sees it as an illumination of the mind. But this is only part of the truth, for there is more on the meaning of the death of Jesus in John’s Gospel than in the others.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels emphasize the divine necessity of the death of Jesus. In addition to the fulfillment motive, the idea of necessity is strong in the first prediction by Jesus of his approaching death. In John’s Gospel Jesus speaks of his “hour” several times in the earlier stages of his ministry as “not yet,” but in the later stages as having arrived. There is a sense of definite movement toward a climax, the hour undoubtedly being the hour of the Passion (cf. Jn 17:1). There is not room for any disillusionment here. Jesus knew that only through the hour of death could the Father be glorified. The climax was according to an orderly plan.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus evidently regarded his death as in some ways a sacrifice. The clearest indication of this is in the words of institution at the Last Supper. The cup is connected with the blood of the new covenant, which is said to be for the “remission of sins” (Mt 26:26-28). No explanation is given of the way in which the coming death, signified by the broken bread and poured-out wine, would bring about forgiveness of sins. But the immediate realization by the early church that Christ died for our sins (cf. 1 Cor 15:3) shows that the importance of what Jesus said had been clearly grasped. The new covenant idea is parallel to the old covenant, which according to Exodus 24 was sealed with sacrificial blood; there can be little doubt that Jesus had this in mind when he spoke the words about the new covenant. It was also akin to the ideas expressed in Jeremiah 31, referring to a covenant written on the heart rather than graven in stone.<\/p>\n<p>Another aspect of the death of Christ seen especially in John’s Gospel is the sense of completion that went with it. In Jesus’ prayer in John 17, as he faces the cross, he declares that he has finished the work that the Father had given him to do (Jn 17:4). This is reinforced by the cry from the cross, “It is finished,” which only John records (19:30). This sense of accomplishment gives an air of triumph to what might otherwise have been considered a disaster.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheHolySpirit\">Teachings about the Holy Spirit<\/p>\n<p>At several of the major events in the life of Jesus, the Evangelists note the activity of the Spirit (e.g., the Virgin Birth, the Baptism, the Temptation). It is to be expected, therefore, that Jesus would have instructed his disciples about the Spirit. However, there is surprisingly little in the synoptic Gospels on this theme. Most of the teachings come from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus began his preaching ministry in Nazareth, according to Luke, he read the statement in Isaiah 61:1-2 about the Spirit of God and applied it to himself. He saw his ministry as being inaugurated by the Spirit. This becomes clear in the way in which he responded to the charge that he cast out demons by means of Beelzebub, prince of the demons. He identified the reality of the coming of the kingdom by the fact that he was casting out evil spirits by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). He was, moreover, sensitive to the seriousness of blaspheming the Spirit, which he implies his accusers were in danger of doing. Whatever he did in his ministry he saw as an activity of the Spirit, and this was especially so in the contest with evil spirits.<\/p>\n<p>While warning his disciples that they would meet with opposition, Jesus assured them of the Spirit’s support when they were forced to appear before kings or governors (Mt 10:19-20; Mk 13:11). Indeed, he told them that the Spirit would speak through them, thus emphasizing that he expected a continuation of the Spirit’s activity in the future. Luke records one instance in which Jesus comments on what fathers will do for their children and asks whether God will not give the Holy Spirit to those who ask (Lk 11:13). The assumption is that God regards the Holy Spirit as the best gift to give his children. On yet another occasion, Jesus recognized that David was inspired by the Holy Spirit when he wrote Psalm 110 (Mk 12:36), reflecting Jesus’ belief in the Spirit’s agency in the production of Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John provides a more detailed development of what Jesus taught about the Spirit. Teachings about the Spirit are usually linked to Jesus’ teachings about giving eternal life to those who believe in him and receive him. At the same time he spoke of the new birth and eternal life to Nicodemus, Jesus also spoke of the Spirit (Jn 3:3-8, 15-16). When he spoke of water of life to the Samaritan woman, he also spoke of the Spirit (4:14, 23-24). The same holds true for the discourses on the bread of life (6:48-63) and river of life (7:37-39). Throughout the Gospel, Jesus declares to various people that he can give them eternal life if they would believe in him. He promises them the water of life, the bread of life, and the light of life, but no one could really partake of these until after the Lord was resurrected. As a foretaste, as a sample, they could receive a certain measure of life via the Lord’s words, because his words were themselves spirit and life (6:63), but it was not until the Spirit would become available that the believers could actually become the recipients of the divine, eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>After the Lord’s discourse in John 6 (a discourse that was very troubling and offensive to most of his disciples), Jesus said, “It is the Spirit who gives eternal life” (6:63). When the Spirit became available, they could have life. Again, Jesus offered the water of life—even life flowing like rivers of living water—to the Jews assembled at the Feast of Tabernacles. He told them to come and drink of him. But no one could, then and there, come and drink of him. So John added a note: “This He spoke of the Spirit, . . . for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (7:39, <span>nasb<\/span>). Once Jesus would be glorified through resurrection, the Spirit of the glorified Jesus would be available for men to drink. In John 6, Jesus offered himself as the bread of life to be eaten by men; and in John 7, he offered himself as the water of life to refresh men. But no one could eat of him or drink of him until the Spirit of the glorified Jesus was made available, as was intimated in John 6:63 and then stated plainly in John 7:39.<\/p>\n<p>In John 14:16-18, Jesus went one step further in identifying himself with the Spirit. He told the disciples that he would give them another Comforter. Then he told them that they should know who this Comforter was because he was, then and there, abiding with them and would, in the near future, be in them. Who else but Jesus was abiding with them at that time? Then after telling the disciples that the Comforter would come to them, he said, “I am coming to you.” First he said that the Comforter would come to them and abide in them, and then in the same breath he said that he would come to them and abide in them (see 14:20). In short, the coming of the Comforter to the disciples was one and the same as the coming of Jesus to the disciples. The Comforter who was dwelling with the disciples that night was the Spirit in Christ; the Comforter who would be in the disciples (after the resurrection) would be Christ in the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>On the evening of the resurrection, the Lord Jesus appeared to the disciples and then breathed into them the Holy Spirit. This inbreathing, reminiscent of God’s breathing into Adam the breath of life (Gn 2:7), became the fulfillment of all that had been promised and anticipated earlier in John’s Gospel. Through this impartation, the disciples were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Jesus Christ. This historical event marked the genesis of the new creation. Jesus could now be realized as the bread of life, the water of life, and the light of life. The believers now possessed his divine, eternal, risen life. From that time forward, Christ as Spirit indwelt his believers. Thus, in his first epistle John could say, “We know he lives in us because the Holy Spirit lives in us” (1 Jn 3:24).<\/p>\n<p>The indwelling Spirit helped the disciples remember Jesus’ words and actions (Jn 14:26) so that they could teach and write about them with acumen. This means that Jesus did not intend that the preservation of his teachings should be left to chance. All too often theories attempting to explain the way in which the traditions about Jesus and his teachings were transmitted in the period before there were any written Gospels are suggested without any reference to the Holy Spirit. It is not acceptable to concentrate on so-called laws of oral tradition and pay no attention to the unique factor in this case—the Holy Spirit. It is part of the Spirit’s mission to preserve and transmit the teaching of Jesus. What Jesus says in this passage about the Spirit has far-reaching significance for the formation of the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Another important function is the activity of the Spirit in the world. Jesus made it clear that the Spirit would convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment (Jn 16:8). Without the activity of the Spirit, there would be no possibility of the disciples making any impact on the world. Nevertheless, Jesus warned that the world could not receive the Spirit because it did not know him (14:17). The mystery of the Spirit is that he dwells in every believer. This indwelling aspect is of great importance and was particularly developed in the writings of Paul.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutHumanity\">Teachings about Humanity<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught about God’s providential care over all human beings. A person’s hairs are all numbered (Mt 10:30), which is a vivid way of saying that God is concerned about the details of human life. But God is far more concerned with the eternal soul. Jesus made it clear that it would be unprofitable for anyone to gain the world and to lose his or her soul (Mt 16:26; Mk 8:36; Lk 9:25). The focus falls on what a person is and not what he or she has. Jesus even said that a maimed body was preferable to a forfeited life (Mk 9:43-47). One’s total fulfillment depends more on one’s spiritual condition than on one’s environment or physical well-being. He was not, of course, unconcerned about people’s physical state, as his many healings show, but his major concern was with people’s relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus never viewed humans as isolated individuals. Within God’s community people were expected to have responsibility toward one another. The Sermon on the Mount illustrated this social emphasis in the teaching of Jesus. Those who are merciful to others will obtain mercy (Mt 5:7). There is special commendation for peacemakers (v 9). The disciples of Jesus are expected to bring light to others (v 16). They are expected to give more than expected (v 40). Jesus is clearly saying that people have responsibility beyond themselves.<\/p>\n<p>The relation of people to God is one of dependence. Jesus taught men and women to pray to God for daily bread (Mt 6:11) as a reminder that they cannot be wholly self-sufficient. He allowed no place in his teaching for humans to boast in their own achievements.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had some specific things to say about home life. He accepted the sanctity of the marriage contract (Mt 5:31-32; cf. 19:3-9) and therefore showed a high regard for the honor and rights of the wife. It was more in his actions and attitudes rather than his specific teachings that Jesus showed his regard for the status of women. When he spoke of men, he often used the term in the sense of people, including both men and women. There is no suggestion that in matters of faith women were in the least inferior to men. Moreover, Luke points out how many women supported Jesus and his disciples in their travels.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus had a high view of the human potential but also acknowledged their present condition. The stress on repentance (Mt 4:17) shows a sinfulness of which people need to repent. This sense of need is implicit in the instances where Jesus pronounces forgiveness (e.g., to the paralytic, Mt 9:1-8; and to the woman who anointed him, Lk 7:47-48). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4). He takes for granted that they need it and desire to obtain it.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gives no support to any self-righteousness in men or women. This is the burden of his criticism of the religious leaders in various sayings, but particularly in Matthew 23. He was critical of Jewish teachers because they placed so much importance on works of merit as contributing to salvation. His whole approach depended on humans casting themselves on the mercy of God. This is vividly illustrated in the parable about the Pharisee and the tax collector at prayer (Lk 18:10-14). It was the latter who threw himself on the mercy of God and who was commended by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Undoubtedly, Jesus regarded sin as universal. He never suggested that there was anyone who was exempt from it. The major concept of sin in his teachings was alienation from God. This comes out clearly in John’s Gospel, with its strong antithesis between light and darkness, life and death (cf. Jn 5:24). Indeed, the “world” in John’s Gospel represents the system that takes no account of God. But sin is also seen as enslavement to Satan. The life and teachings of Jesus are seen against the background of spiritual conflict. Jesus can even say to his opponents, “You are of your father the devil” (Jn 8:44). He assumes throughout that there are hostile forces bringing man into subjection.<\/p>\n<p>In the parable of the prodigal son, sin against God is linked with sin before the father. In other words, it is regarded in terms of rebellion and revolt (Lk 15:21). This is a different assessment of the son’s offense than the one arrived at by the elder brother, who could see it only in terms of property. The view that humans are essentially in a state of rebellion against God is a basic tenet of Paul’s theological position, and it is important to note that it finds its root in the teachings of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>There is no question that Jesus had much to say about condemnation. Those who did not believe and were therefore outside the provision of salvation that Jesus had made are declared to be already condemned (Jn 3:18). At various times Jesus mentioned judgment to come, which shows that a person’s destiny is related to his or her present spiritual condition. Against this background of humanity’s spiritual need, the whole mission of Jesus must be seen. A person, if left to himself or herself, would be totally unable to achieve salvation, but Jesus came to offer eternal life to those who believe in him (Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheChurch\">Teachings about the Church<\/p>\n<p>Some have supposed that Jesus did not predict that there would be a church. But on two occasions he used the word “church,” which means a people called out by God. On one of the occasions—at Caesarea Philippi—Jesus told Peter that he would build his church upon the rock (Mt 16:16-19). It seems most probable that “rock” was intended to link the foundation of the church to Peter’s particular confession about Jesus. It is certain that the later church was a community that affirmed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. It is important to note that it is Christ himself who is the builder of the church. He assured his disciples that it would be impregnable (the gates of hades would not overcome it). Moreover, one of the functions of the church was to proclaim forgiveness of sins, and this is implied in what Jesus said to Peter. That the words were not intended to refer exclusively to him is clear from Matthew 18:18, where similar words were addressed to all the disciples. The church, according to Matthew 18:17, was to be a community that could settle disputes between believers.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to these specific references to the church, Jesus assumed that his followers would meet together in his name (Mt 18:19-20). In his final words in Matthew’s account, he commissioned them to teach what he had taught them and to baptize new disciples (Mt 28:19-20). He promised his presence would be with them. The command to baptize was reinforced by Jesus’ own example in submitting to John’s baptism. One other special rite that Jesus expected his disciples to observe was the Lord’s Supper. His instructions about this presuppose a later community that could observe it. Since the form of words used in the institution point to the meaning of the death of Christ, it is clear that Jesus intended the future community to be frequently reminded of the center of the faith. The Christian church was to be a group of people who knew that through Christ they had entered into a new relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Although there are no references to the church in John’s Gospel, there are certainly hints that support the community idea. Jesus introduced himself as the Shepherd and spoke of his followers as forming a flock (Jn 10:16). The sheep imagery occurs again in this Gospel when Peter is instructed three times by the risen Lord to feed the sheep (Jn 21:15-17). Another figure of speech that Jesus used to bring out the group idea is that of the many branches that draw their life from the vine, and therefore belong to each other because of their common life in the vine.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus recognized that the future community would need the aid of the Spirit. His teachings on this subject laid the foundation for the evident dependence of the early church on the Spirit, as seen in the book of Acts. Finally, it should be noted that there is a close connection between the church and the kingdom, although they are not identical. The kingdom is more comprehensive than the church, which is included within it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsabouttheFuture\">Teachings about the Future<\/p>\n<p>Jesus thought of the kingdom in terms of both present realization and future hope. The future aspect is related to the end of the age. Although he did not spell it out in specific terms, Jesus did not leave his disciples without any knowledge of how the present age would end. He gave firm assurance that he would return at some time in the future.<\/p>\n<p>He told the disciples that the Son of Man would come with his angels in his Father’s glory (Mt 16:27). In the discourse in which he answers the disciples’ question about the end of the world, he speaks again of the Son of Man coming in clouds with power and glory (Mk 13:26), probably drawn from the familiar language of Daniel 7. Jesus described various signs that would precede his own coming. He spoke of wars, conflicts, earthquakes, famines, and disturbances in the heavens. The gospel was to be preached to all nations. At the same time many false Christs would arise.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus gave such details about his return to encourage his disciples in the face of persecution. The future hope had a definitely practical purpose. The disciples were urged to watch. The coming would happen as unexpectedly as a thief in the night. Jesus said that even he himself did not know when the coming would take place (Mk 13:32).<\/p>\n<p>Another important theme affecting the future is emphasized in Jesus’ teachings about resurrection. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the body. They attempted to trap Jesus with a question about a woman who had been married seven times. They wanted to know whose husband she would be at the resurrection (Mk 12:18-27). Jesus pointed out that there would be no marriage when the dead rise. The Sadducees’ idea about resurrection was clearly wrong. Jesus’ teaching was that the resurrected would be like the angels. There is no doubt about the resurrection of the dead, although no information is given about the resurrection body. Jesus told a story about a rich man and a poor man who both died (Lk 16:19-31). In the afterlife the rich man cries out in torment, while the poor man enjoys a state of blessedness. What is most clear from this is the certainty of the afterlife and the fact of a distinction between the two men, although we are not told on what grounds the distinction is made. Elsewhere in his teachings, Jesus suggested that the most vital requirement is faith in himself. The conversation between Jesus and the dying thief on the cross suggests that paradise for the latter consisted in an awareness of the presence of Jesus (Lk 23:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>The theme of rewards and punishment occurs in many passages. In Matthew 16:27 Jesus says that the Son of Man will reward everyone according to what he or she has done. Those who are worthless are promised punishment in darkness (Mt 25:30). Moreover, Jesus spoke of a day of judgment on which men and women must give an account, even of all their careless words (12:36-37). In the parable of the sheep and the goats, he spoke of a separation that the Son of Man will make when he comes. Those commended are those who have shown concern for the believers (25:31-46).<\/p>\n<p>Among Jesus’ most solemn statements are those that speak of hell. There is no way of getting around his teachings about eternal punishment for the unrighteous (as in Mt 25:41, 46), which is opposite to the eternal life promised to the righteous. He taught that his disciples would have a place prepared for them in heaven (Jn 14:2), and spoke of a Book of Life in which the names of his disciples were written (Lk 10:20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TeachingsaboutMoralIssues\">Teachings about Moral Issues<\/p>\n<p>Much of the teaching of Jesus is concerned with moral issues—so much so that some scholars have concluded that this was the main burden of his teaching. But the moral teachings cannot be considered apart from the many facets of his teachings outlined above. It has been said that there are close parallels between the teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of Judaism. What is distinctive about Jesus’ teachings about morality is that the motive and power behind moral conduct is not conceived in terms of laws that must be obeyed. Right conduct is seen to be the result of a right relationship with God.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was himself the pattern for moral behavior. He made clear that his aim was to fulfill the will of God. There is no sense of legalism in his approach to ethical decisions. When—in the Sermon on the Mount—he compared his own teaching with that of Moses, he showed the importance of penetrating to the inner meaning (cf. Mt 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-32). On the face of it, Jesus made more rigorous demands than the Mosaic law, because he was concerned with probing the motives as well as the actions. Many have dismissed the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount as entirely impractical, but Jesus never intended that his teaching would be easy; he set as a target nothing less than the perfection of God himself (Mt 5:48). Nevertheless, he called his yoke easy and his burden light (11:29-30), which suggests that he was not setting out an impossible ethical pattern. It must be remembered that he was not producing a manifesto for society. His concern was that each individual should have powerful motives for right decisions on matters of conduct. His reaction against a rigid application of Sabbath observance at the expense of the welfare of a needy person illustrates this point. Concern for others was rated higher than ritual correctness.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>No account of the life and teachings of Jesus would be complete without some indication of the place that Jesus Christ gained in the developing church. Such a quest naturally takes us outside the scope of the Gospels into the testimony of the book of Acts and Paul’s letters. There we can see whether the predictions of Jesus were fulfilled and whether in fact the early Christians took his teaching seriously. Although there can be no question that Jesus Christ became central to the faith of the early Christians, he was regarded from many points of view. He was seen as Messiah in the sense of a spiritual deliverer, as Lord in the sense of being sovereign over his people, as Servant in the sense of his obedience to suffering, as Son in his relation to his Father. In many ways the full understanding of what and who he was could not have occurred until after the resurrection. Therefore, we find that many facets of his teachings about himself were more fully developed in the reflections of his people. This is true in a special sense of the writings of the apostle Paul.<\/p>\n<p>Many have found a problem in linking the Gospels with their detailed presentation of the acts and teachings of Jesus with the Christ who is so central in Paul’s beliefs. The problem arises because the apostle does not refer to any specific incident in the life of Jesus and does not reflect in his epistles any acquaintance with the large amount of teaching material in the Gospels. Does this suggest that Paul had no interest in the historical Jesus? Or could it be maintained that he knew nothing about him? Those who have driven a wedge between Paul and Jesus have not given sufficient weight to those incidental indications that Paul knew a great deal more about the historical Jesus than he states in his letters. He writes, for instance, about the meekness and gentleness of Christ (2 Cor 10:1), suggesting that he knew that Jesus had said of himself that he was meek and lowly of heart (Mt 11:29). Moreover, Paul speaks of the poverty of Christ (2 Cor 8:9) and must have known that the Son of Man had nowhere to lay his head. He certainly knows the details of how Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor 11:23-26), and he knows of his death by crucifixion. It seems reasonable to conclude that Paul assumes that his readers will be acquainted with the Gospel material.<\/p>\n<p>It is perhaps useful in this connection to inquire whether the life and teachings of Jesus played a significant part in the early Christian proclamation. One passage that is valuable in this respect is Acts 10:36-38. In Peter’s address to Cornelius, he spoke of God’s having anointed Jesus of Nazareth, and of Jesus’ having gone about doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil. It is clear that some account of the acts of Jesus was included in the early preaching, and there is no reason to suppose that this was not a regular procedure.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the example of Jesus was a powerful motive for promoting right behavior. Peter appeals to it in encouraging Christians who were suffering for their faith (1 Pt 2:21). Paul also knows the value of imitation (1 Cor 11:1; 1 Thes 1:6). Since Jesus was recognized as being a man who did not sin (cf. 2 Cor 5:21), his behavior patterns would have proved invaluable for those who needed a new standard for moral action. While this idea of example is unquestionably present in the Epistles, it would be quite wrong to suppose that it formed a major part of Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>There are a few references to the teachings of Jesus in the non-Gospel portion of the NT. In the Letter of James, which is almost wholly practical, there are more allusions to the teachings of Jesus than anywhere else in the NT. This is especially true in echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and it shows the strong contribution that the moral teaching of Jesus had on the ethical values of the early Christians. Most of the expositions of doctrine in the Epistles find their basis in some aspect of the teachings of Jesus. These teachings have an ongoing significance for the development of the church.<\/p>\n<p>To what extent is knowledge of the life and teachings of Jesus relevant to the 21st century? Existential theologians have driven such a wedge between the Christ of faith and the Jesus of history that the latter has ceased to have any importance for them. Christians today, no less than their first-century predecessors, need to know that the object of their faith is the same one who lived and taught in Galilee and Judea.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Christology; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Savior; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","summary_en":"JESUS CHRIST, Teachings of Because of the wide variety of forms in which the teachings of Jesus have been preserved, it is difficult to bring out the essence of that teaching in a systematic way. Jesus did not present us with a theological system. His words were essentially practical in intent. Yet from all the variety of sayings it is possible to extract a clear idea of what Jesus thought about a number of important issues. What was his teaching about God? What did he think about himself? Wh...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55340,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","summary_en":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82966,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","summary_en":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110592,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","summary_en":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138218,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:36","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:36","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:36-37<\/strong> The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need <em>your soul<\/em> to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","summary_en":"8:36-37 The implied answer to Jesus’ rhetorical question is that possessing the entire world has no value if you give up eternal life. “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose” (Jim Elliot). You need your soul to enjoy the benefits of the world to come. When you forfeit your life or soul, there is nothing you can give to purchase it back.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"38":[{"id":701,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adultery","title_en":"Adultery","content_ro":"<h3>ADULTERY<\/h3>\n<p>A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife.<\/p>\n<p>In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1 Cor 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>Any imbalance between the sexes was dispelled by Jesus in his teaching on divorce and remarriage. While he did not rule out the possibility of divorce in cases of sexual unfaithfulness (Mt 5:32; 19:9), he warned that in all other circumstances remarriage involves both (ex-)husband and (ex-)wife in adultery. Paul added that the charge of adultery only applies if the remarried person’s original partner is still alive (Rom 7:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also sharpened the OT’s definition of adultery by applying it to a man’s thought life. Any man who fantasizes in lust (as distinct from just being tempted) has committed adultery in mind and intention, even though there is no physical contact (Mt 5:27-28; cf. Jb 31:1, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s condemnation of adultery is written into the heart of the OT law, prophecy, and wisdom literature. The Ten Commandments ban it unequivocally (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18). The prophets list it among offenses that attract God’s anger and judgment (Jer 23:11-14; Ez 22:11; Mal 3:5). And the book of Proverbs scorns it as a senseless act by which a man destroys himself (Prv 6:23-35; cf. 7:6-27).<\/p>\n<p>The NT echoes that clear condemnation. Where there is no repentance, adultery excludes those who practice it from God’s kingdom (1 Cor 6:9). It is the very opposite of love of one’s neighbor (Rom 13:9-10), and it stands under the judgment of God himself (Heb 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the penalty for adultery is death—for both the man and the woman (Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22). The same applies if the woman is single but engaged to another man, assuming she has not been raped (in which case only the man is to be executed—Dt 22:23-27). The refrain “You will cleanse the land from evil” (22:24) shows that adultery was considered a serious threat to society’s health, not simply an attack on the family lives of the two people involved.<\/p>\n<p>With such serious consequences, it was important to establish guilt beyond doubt. In cases of serious suspicion but insufficient evidence, the wife concerned was put through an elaborate ritual test that included taking an oath and drinking bitter water. The result was not a matter of chance because she stood in the Lord’s presence (Nm 5:11-31).<\/p>\n<p>In both the OT and NT, the language of adultery is used figuratively to describe human unfaithfulness to God. The OT prophets likened God’s covenant relationship with his people to marriage (Is 54:5-8; cf. Rv 21:2), so in their eyes the breaking of that relationship, especially by idolatry, was equivalent to spiritual adultery (Jer 5:7-8; 13:22-27; Ez 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the same imagery to characterize those who either rejected his claims or showed their lack of faith in him by demanding unnecessary extra signs of his deity (Mt 12:39; 16:4; Mk 8:38). And in another vivid NT passage, James describes God as a loving, jealous husband coming to deal with his adulterous people who have become good friends with the world and its false standards (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>This is the special theme of the prophet Hosea. God used the prophet’s own experience of a marriage broken by adultery to teach the seriousness of his people’s unfaithfulness to him (Hos 2:2-6) and his keen longing for a full reconciliation (3:1-5). Spiritual infidelity, like physical adultery, brings God’s judgment. But in both cases his overwhelming desire is for a mended relationship following sincere repentance (Jer 3:1-14; Ez 16:1-63).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Fornication.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADULTERY<\/h3>\n<p>A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife.<\/p>\n<p>In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1 Cor 6:15).<\/p>\n<p>Any imbalance between the sexes was dispelled by Jesus in his teaching on divorce and remarriage. While he did not rule out the possibility of divorce in cases of sexual unfaithfulness (Mt 5:32; 19:9), he warned that in all other circumstances remarriage involves both (ex-)husband and (ex-)wife in adultery. Paul added that the charge of adultery only applies if the remarried person’s original partner is still alive (Rom 7:2-3).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also sharpened the OT’s definition of adultery by applying it to a man’s thought life. Any man who fantasizes in lust (as distinct from just being tempted) has committed adultery in mind and intention, even though there is no physical contact (Mt 5:27-28; cf. Jb 31:1, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s condemnation of adultery is written into the heart of the OT law, prophecy, and wisdom literature. The Ten Commandments ban it unequivocally (Ex 20:14; Dt 5:18). The prophets list it among offenses that attract God’s anger and judgment (Jer 23:11-14; Ez 22:11; Mal 3:5). And the book of Proverbs scorns it as a senseless act by which a man destroys himself (Prv 6:23-35; cf. 7:6-27).<\/p>\n<p>The NT echoes that clear condemnation. Where there is no repentance, adultery excludes those who practice it from God’s kingdom (1 Cor 6:9). It is the very opposite of love of one’s neighbor (Rom 13:9-10), and it stands under the judgment of God himself (Heb 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the penalty for adultery is death—for both the man and the woman (Lv 20:10; Dt 22:22). The same applies if the woman is single but engaged to another man, assuming she has not been raped (in which case only the man is to be executed—Dt 22:23-27). The refrain “You will cleanse the land from evil” (22:24) shows that adultery was considered a serious threat to society’s health, not simply an attack on the family lives of the two people involved.<\/p>\n<p>With such serious consequences, it was important to establish guilt beyond doubt. In cases of serious suspicion but insufficient evidence, the wife concerned was put through an elaborate ritual test that included taking an oath and drinking bitter water. The result was not a matter of chance because she stood in the Lord’s presence (Nm 5:11-31).<\/p>\n<p>In both the OT and NT, the language of adultery is used figuratively to describe human unfaithfulness to God. The OT prophets likened God’s covenant relationship with his people to marriage (Is 54:5-8; cf. Rv 21:2), so in their eyes the breaking of that relationship, especially by idolatry, was equivalent to spiritual adultery (Jer 5:7-8; 13:22-27; Ez 23:37).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the same imagery to characterize those who either rejected his claims or showed their lack of faith in him by demanding unnecessary extra signs of his deity (Mt 12:39; 16:4; Mk 8:38). And in another vivid NT passage, James describes God as a loving, jealous husband coming to deal with his adulterous people who have become good friends with the world and its false standards (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>This is the special theme of the prophet Hosea. God used the prophet’s own experience of a marriage broken by adultery to teach the seriousness of his people’s unfaithfulness to him (Hos 2:2-6) and his keen longing for a full reconciliation (3:1-5). Spiritual infidelity, like physical adultery, brings God’s judgment. But in both cases his overwhelming desire is for a mended relationship following sincere repentance (Jer 3:1-14; Ez 16:1-63).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Divorce; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Fornication.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADULTERY A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife. In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1...","summary_en":"ADULTERY A breach of the unity of marriage. It describes any act of sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband, and all sexual intercourse involving a married man and a woman other than his wife. In OT times, polygamous unions were not considered adulterous (cf. Dt 21:15). Nor was a husband branded as an adulterer if he had intercourse with a slave woman (Gn 16:1-4; 30:1-5) or a prostitute (Gn 38:15-18)—though the latter was, of course, condemned as immoral (1...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14046,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Glory","title_en":"Glory","content_ro":"<h3>GLORY<\/h3>\n<p>The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGod\">The Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence.<\/p>\n<h5>As an Attribute<\/h5>\n<p>God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as the glorious Father (Eph 1:17) and the King of glory (Ps 24); he is exalted above the heavens, and his glory is over all the earth (Pss 57:5, 11; 108:5; 113:4). He is the God of glory who appeared to the patriarchs of the OT (Acts 7:2). He is jealous to maintain his glory and unwilling that it be given to another (Is 42:8); he acts to bring glory to himself (Ps 79:9; Is 48:11).<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God is proclaimed by the Creation (Pss 19:1; 97:6; Rom 1:20). It is revealed by his mighty acts of salvation and deliverance (1 Chr 16:24; Pss 72:18-19; 96:3; 145:10-12; Jn 11:4, 40). His glory is the theme of the praise (1 Chr 16:24-29; Pss 29:1-2, 9; 66:1-2; 96:7-8; 115:1; Is 42:12; Rom 4:20; Phil 2:9-11).<\/p>\n<h5>As His Presence<\/h5>\n<p>References to the glory of the Lord are often to particular historical manifestations of his presence; images of light and fire are prominently associated with these occurrences. The foremost example is what is known in rabbinical literature as the shekinah glory, a phrase meaning the “dwelling glory.” It refers primarily to the presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first explicit reference to the glory cloud is found in Exodus 13:21-22. At the time of the exodus, the glory of God appeared in the pillar of cloud and fire to lead the people through the sea and wilderness (Neh 9:11-12, 19). At Sinai, with Israel encamped around the mountain, the glory of God comes in the cloud and fire to speak with Moses in the sight of the people (Ex 19:9, 16-18; 24:15-18; Dt 5:5, 22-24). When Moses is given a glimpse of that glory unconcealed by the cloud and fire, his own face becomes radiant and must be veiled because of the people’s fear (Ex 33:18-23; 34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>The picture of Israel encamped around the glory of God on Sinai portrays God dwelling in the midst of his people. When the tabernacle is completed and the people set out on their march, the glory cloud of God’s presence dwells above them throughout their journey (Ex 40:34-38; Nm 10:11-12). When they encamp, the tribes encircle the tabernacle (Nm 1:50–2:2), and the cloud reminds them of his presence in their midst. Later, the same glory filled the new temple that Solomon builds (2 Chr 5:13–6:1; 7:1-3). The psalmists celebrated Jerusalem and the temple as the place where his glory dwelt (Pss 26:8; 63:2; 85:9); God was in their midst.<\/p>\n<p>Later in Israel’s history they denied God’s glorious presence (Is 3:8) and exchanged the glory of the Lord for idols made by human hands (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:10-11; cf. Rom 1:23). Because of their disobedience, judgment came against Jerusalem; the penalties of covenant violation were enforced. God would no longer be the God of a disobedient people (Hos 1:9). God’s presence in the glory cloud left the temple (Ez 10:4, 18-19; 11:22), and Israel went into exile (12:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of this judgment God determined to bring a remnant to rebuild the city and the temple. In his visions Ezekiel saw the glory of the Lord return to dwell in the temple again (Ez 43:2-9), a time when the glory would return to a purified people and dwell among them forever. When the exile was over and the second temple was under construction, Haggai and Zechariah urged the people on with the promise of the return of the glory of God to fill the temple as it had done in the first temple and to “be glory in their midst” (Hg 2:3-9; Zec 2:5, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGodinJesusChrist\">The Glory of God in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>We are not told if the shekinah glory returned to the second temple. But we are told that God’s glory was seen again on earth in the person of Jesus Christ. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and <em>dwelt<\/em> among us, and we beheld his <em>glory, glory<\/em> as of the only Son” (italics added). As such, Jesus was the new tabernacle for God’s abiding glory. In Jesus, God dwelt among people. Since Christ was (and is) the very image of God, to see the light of his face was to know the glory of God (2 Cor 4:4-6). To see Jesus was to see a “light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel” (Lk 2:30-32). The disciples who witnessed the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-8) saw his glory in a marvelous way (2 Pt 1:16-17), for it was a glory that burst out of his human body. This outburst of glory prefigured the glorification Christ experienced in resurrection and ascension (see Jn 17:5; Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Because Jesus humbled himself and was obedient to the point of death, God highly exalted him (Phil 2:8-9). After he suffered death on the cross, he entered into his glory (Lk 24:26) with a new and glorious body (1 Cor 15:39-43; Phil 3:21). The glorified Christ appeared to his servants. Stephen saw his glory (Acts 7:55), and Saul was blinded by his splendor (9:3). That same Christ is predicted to return in glory. He will sit on his throne in judgment (Mt 25:31); evil will be punished (16:27; 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27; 2 Thes 2:9-10). Those who have professed him before men need not fear his glorious appearing (Mk 8:38).<\/p>\n<p>At the consummation, the whole earth will be filled with his glory (Ps 72:19; Is 6:3; Hb 2:14). No longer will a glory cloud rest above a temple to mark the Holy Place, for there will be a new heaven and a new earth (Rv 21:1). The Holy City will have the radiance of the glory of God (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryandthePeopleofGod\">Glory and the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The people of God have experienced the glory of the presence of God. The glory cloud of the OT was <em>their<\/em> glory (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11). Christ came as the embodiment of the glory of God; God was in the midst of his people. When Christ ascended, he sent his Spirit to the believers (Jn 16:7-14) so that God could live in the midst of his people. The Spirit of glory rests on those who suffer for the name of Christ (1 Pt 4:14); that Spirit is the guarantee of the glorious inheritance of the saints (Rom 8:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God has given to his people the hope of glory (Rom 5:2; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27; Jude 1:24-25). Those whom he has chosen he will also glorify (Rom 8:30; 9:23); they will share in the glory of Christ (Col 3:4; 2 Thes 2:14; 2 Tm 2:10). The sufferings of this age do not compare with the glory that will be revealed (Rom 8:18; 2 Cor 4:17). The whole of creation longs to see the glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom 8:21). This hope of glory is so certain that Peter can speak of participating in it even now (1 Pt 5:1) while looking forward to that eternal glory (v 10). As partakers in the glory of Christ, the church is called to glorify God. Because of the hope that is in them, they purify themselves (1 Jn 3:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Boast; God, Being and Attributes of; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Shekinah; Theophany; Wealth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GLORY<\/h3>\n<p>The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGod\">The Glory of God<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence.<\/p>\n<h5>As an Attribute<\/h5>\n<p>God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as the glorious Father (Eph 1:17) and the King of glory (Ps 24); he is exalted above the heavens, and his glory is over all the earth (Pss 57:5, 11; 108:5; 113:4). He is the God of glory who appeared to the patriarchs of the OT (Acts 7:2). He is jealous to maintain his glory and unwilling that it be given to another (Is 42:8); he acts to bring glory to himself (Ps 79:9; Is 48:11).<\/p>\n<p>The glory of God is proclaimed by the Creation (Pss 19:1; 97:6; Rom 1:20). It is revealed by his mighty acts of salvation and deliverance (1 Chr 16:24; Pss 72:18-19; 96:3; 145:10-12; Jn 11:4, 40). His glory is the theme of the praise (1 Chr 16:24-29; Pss 29:1-2, 9; 66:1-2; 96:7-8; 115:1; Is 42:12; Rom 4:20; Phil 2:9-11).<\/p>\n<h5>As His Presence<\/h5>\n<p>References to the glory of the Lord are often to particular historical manifestations of his presence; images of light and fire are prominently associated with these occurrences. The foremost example is what is known in rabbinical literature as the shekinah glory, a phrase meaning the “dwelling glory.” It refers primarily to the presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire in the OT.<\/p>\n<p>The first explicit reference to the glory cloud is found in Exodus 13:21-22. At the time of the exodus, the glory of God appeared in the pillar of cloud and fire to lead the people through the sea and wilderness (Neh 9:11-12, 19). At Sinai, with Israel encamped around the mountain, the glory of God comes in the cloud and fire to speak with Moses in the sight of the people (Ex 19:9, 16-18; 24:15-18; Dt 5:5, 22-24). When Moses is given a glimpse of that glory unconcealed by the cloud and fire, his own face becomes radiant and must be veiled because of the people’s fear (Ex 33:18-23; 34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:7-18).<\/p>\n<p>The picture of Israel encamped around the glory of God on Sinai portrays God dwelling in the midst of his people. When the tabernacle is completed and the people set out on their march, the glory cloud of God’s presence dwells above them throughout their journey (Ex 40:34-38; Nm 10:11-12). When they encamp, the tribes encircle the tabernacle (Nm 1:50–2:2), and the cloud reminds them of his presence in their midst. Later, the same glory filled the new temple that Solomon builds (2 Chr 5:13–6:1; 7:1-3). The psalmists celebrated Jerusalem and the temple as the place where his glory dwelt (Pss 26:8; 63:2; 85:9); God was in their midst.<\/p>\n<p>Later in Israel’s history they denied God’s glorious presence (Is 3:8) and exchanged the glory of the Lord for idols made by human hands (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:10-11; cf. Rom 1:23). Because of their disobedience, judgment came against Jerusalem; the penalties of covenant violation were enforced. God would no longer be the God of a disobedient people (Hos 1:9). God’s presence in the glory cloud left the temple (Ez 10:4, 18-19; 11:22), and Israel went into exile (12:1-15).<\/p>\n<p>Yet out of this judgment God determined to bring a remnant to rebuild the city and the temple. In his visions Ezekiel saw the glory of the Lord return to dwell in the temple again (Ez 43:2-9), a time when the glory would return to a purified people and dwell among them forever. When the exile was over and the second temple was under construction, Haggai and Zechariah urged the people on with the promise of the return of the glory of God to fill the temple as it had done in the first temple and to “be glory in their midst” (Hg 2:3-9; Zec 2:5, 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGloryofGodinJesusChrist\">The Glory of God in Jesus Christ<\/p>\n<p>We are not told if the shekinah glory returned to the second temple. But we are told that God’s glory was seen again on earth in the person of Jesus Christ. John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and <em>dwelt<\/em> among us, and we beheld his <em>glory, glory<\/em> as of the only Son” (italics added). As such, Jesus was the new tabernacle for God’s abiding glory. In Jesus, God dwelt among people. Since Christ was (and is) the very image of God, to see the light of his face was to know the glory of God (2 Cor 4:4-6). To see Jesus was to see a “light to the Gentiles and the glory of Israel” (Lk 2:30-32). The disciples who witnessed the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-8) saw his glory in a marvelous way (2 Pt 1:16-17), for it was a glory that burst out of his human body. This outburst of glory prefigured the glorification Christ experienced in resurrection and ascension (see Jn 17:5; Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Because Jesus humbled himself and was obedient to the point of death, God highly exalted him (Phil 2:8-9). After he suffered death on the cross, he entered into his glory (Lk 24:26) with a new and glorious body (1 Cor 15:39-43; Phil 3:21). The glorified Christ appeared to his servants. Stephen saw his glory (Acts 7:55), and Saul was blinded by his splendor (9:3). That same Christ is predicted to return in glory. He will sit on his throne in judgment (Mt 25:31); evil will be punished (16:27; 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27; 2 Thes 2:9-10). Those who have professed him before men need not fear his glorious appearing (Mk 8:38).<\/p>\n<p>At the consummation, the whole earth will be filled with his glory (Ps 72:19; Is 6:3; Hb 2:14). No longer will a glory cloud rest above a temple to mark the Holy Place, for there will be a new heaven and a new earth (Rv 21:1). The Holy City will have the radiance of the glory of God (vv 10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GloryandthePeopleofGod\">Glory and the People of God<\/p>\n<p>The people of God have experienced the glory of the presence of God. The glory cloud of the OT was <em>their<\/em> glory (Ps 106:20; Jer 2:11). Christ came as the embodiment of the glory of God; God was in the midst of his people. When Christ ascended, he sent his Spirit to the believers (Jn 16:7-14) so that God could live in the midst of his people. The Spirit of glory rests on those who suffer for the name of Christ (1 Pt 4:14); that Spirit is the guarantee of the glorious inheritance of the saints (Rom 8:16-17).<\/p>\n<p>God has given to his people the hope of glory (Rom 5:2; Phil 3:21; Col 1:27; Jude 1:24-25). Those whom he has chosen he will also glorify (Rom 8:30; 9:23); they will share in the glory of Christ (Col 3:4; 2 Thes 2:14; 2 Tm 2:10). The sufferings of this age do not compare with the glory that will be revealed (Rom 8:18; 2 Cor 4:17). The whole of creation longs to see the glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom 8:21). This hope of glory is so certain that Peter can speak of participating in it even now (1 Pt 5:1) while looking forward to that eternal glory (v 10). As partakers in the glory of Christ, the church is called to glorify God. Because of the hope that is in them, they purify themselves (1 Jn 3:3).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Boast; God, Being and Attributes of; Pillar of Fire and Cloud; Shekinah; Theophany; Wealth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GLORY The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity. The Glory of God The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence. As an Attribute God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as ...","summary_en":"GLORY The singular splendor of God and the consequences for humanity. The Glory of God The glory of God can be described in two senses: (1) as a general category or attribute, and (2) as a specific category referring to particular historical manifestations of his presence. As an Attribute God’s glory refers primarily to his majestic beauty and splendor; it also refers to the expression of God’s character (Rom 3:23). The Scriptures record praise to his glorious name (Neh 9:5), describe him as ...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31625,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Prophecy","title_en":"Prophecy","content_ro":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PROPHECY<\/h3>\n<p>Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>• Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<p>• Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheOldTestament\">Prophecy in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>One of the clearest and most significant statements on the nature of prophetic inspiration in the OT is found in Numbers 12:6-8: “The <span>Lord<\/span> said to them, ‘Now listen to me! Even with prophets, I the <span>Lord<\/span> communicate by visions and dreams. But that is not how I communicate with my servant Moses. He is entrusted with my entire house. I speak to him face to face, directly and not in riddles! He sees the <span>Lord<\/span> as he is’ ” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Several important insights into the nature of prophetic inspiration are found in this passage: (1) The prophetic gift of Moses was unique in that he alone received revelations directly from God. (2) Ordinarily, prophetic revelation was received through the medium of a dream or a vision. (3) The meaning of prophetic revelation is not always completely clear; prophecy is sometimes ambiguous.<\/p>\n<p>Further insight into the nature of prophetic revelation is found in Deuteronomy 18:18: “I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their brethren; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him” (<span>rsv<\/span>). While this passage is of interest because Jesus was identified as “the prophet like Moses” who came in fulfillment of this prediction (Acts 3:22; 7:37), the more immediate historical reference is to the succession of prophets that guided Israel from Joshua to Malachi. The phrase “I will put my words in his mouth” refers to the process of divine inspiration and is reminiscent of the common OT prophetic formula “the word of the Lord came to [such and such a prophet]” (for examples, see 1 Sm 15:10; 2 Sm 24:11; 1 Kgs 19:9; Jon 1:1; Hg 1:1; 2:1, 20; Zec 7:1, 8; 8:1). A true prophet is one who speaks (or repeats) all that God has told him.<\/p>\n<h5>Modes of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>Dreams were a commonly recognized mode of inspiration throughout the ancient world, though they were more highly regarded in Greece than in ancient Israel. Revelatory dreams in the Bible fall into two major categories: (1) dreams whose meaning is self-evident, and (2) symbolic dreams that usually require the expertise of an interpreter of dreams. Both types normally involve both visual and auditory elements. In those dreams whose meaning is self-evident, normally a supernatural being (God or an angel) appears to the dreamer and speaks to him or her in a straightforward manner.<\/p>\n<p>More frequently, revelatory dreams have symbolic elements that require interpretation. The two great dream interpreters of the OT are Joseph and Daniel; the latter is clearly a prophet. The two symbolic dreams that Joseph himself dreamed (Gn 37:5-11) had sufficiently self-evident meaning so that his brothers and father were able to interpret them immediately. More complex were the dreams of the butler and baker (40:1-19) and of Pharaoh (41:1-36), which Joseph was able to interpret with the help of God. Similarly, Daniel was enabled to interpret the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar (Dn 2:25-45; 4:4-27). The skill in interpreting such dreams was attributed by both Joseph and Daniel to God (Gn 40:8; 41:16, 25; Dn 2:27-30; cf. 4:9). While dreams are used almost interchangeably with visions in referring to modes of prophetic inspiration (Jl 2:28), dreams do not occupy a significant part in the prophetic revelations of any of the OT prophets, with the exception of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most characteristic modes of prophetic inspiration was the vision (Nm 12:6; 24:4, 16; Hos 12:10). The revelatory visions experienced by the prophets were not limited to visual phenomena alone but also included the auditory dimension as well. In Isaiah 1:1, the author describes his entire prophetic book as a “vision”: “These visions concerning Judah and Jerusalem came to Isaiah son of Amoz during the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah—all kings of Judah” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Yet in the very next verse, Isaiah says, “Hear, O heavens! Listen, O earth! This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says.” Again, in Amos 1:1, “The <em>words<\/em> of Amos, who was among the shepherds of Tekoa, which he <em>saw<\/em> concerning Israel” (<span>rsv<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of Prophetic Inspiration<\/h5>\n<p>All prophecy, whether biblical or not, presupposes that the prophet either possessed or was possessed by a personal supernatural power. The external behavioral manifestations of this possession can exhibit great variety.<\/p>\n<p>The prophetic phenomenon generally designated “ecstatic” prophecy appears to have existed in Canaan prior to the arrival of the Hebrew tribes in the 13th century <span>BC<\/span>. The first reference to ecstatic prophecy in Israel occurs in 1 Samuel 10:5-13 (11th century <span>BC<\/span>), and it persisted at least till the sixth century <span>BC<\/span> (Jer 29:26).<\/p>\n<p>The ecstatic prophet achieves a trancelike state by self-induced means. The most common devices used to achieve a state of ecstasy were musical instruments, such as the harp, tambourine, flute, and lyre (1 Sm 10:5). Among the prophets of Baal, self-flagellation was another means of inducing ecstasy (1 Kgs 18:28-29).<\/p>\n<p>This kind of prophetic ecstasy was usually practiced by groups of prophets (1 Sm 10:5), and such ecstasy was contagious. When Saul met a band of such prophets, the Spirit of God came upon him and he, too, began to prophesy (vv 10-13), a phenomenon that occurred repeatedly to various messengers sent by Saul on a later occasion (19:20-22). At that time Saul again prophesied, and his ecstatic behavior is described in 1 Samuel 19:24. When Elisha was asked to prophesy for King Jehoram of Israel, he first requested a minstrel. When the minstrel played, the power of the Lord came upon him (2 Kgs 3:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TypesofOldTestamentProphets\">Types of Old Testament Prophets<\/p>\n<p>There are two basic types of prophetic commission in the OT. One type is that of a narrative call by God to a particular individual whose objections to the call are gradually overcome in a dialogue between himself and God. The classic example of this type of prophetic commission is found in Jeremiah 1:4-8:<\/p>\n<p>The <span>Lord<\/span> gave me a message. He said, “I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb. Before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as my spokesman to the world.”<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>“O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>“Don’t say that,” the <span>Lord<\/span> replied, “for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and take care of you. I, the <span>Lord<\/span>, have spoken!” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Similar prophetic commissions including such dialogues are associated with the calls of Moses (Ex 3:1–4:17) and Gideon (Jgs 6:11-17).<\/p>\n<p>The second major form of prophetic commission is the “throne vision.” An outstanding example is Isaiah 6:1-8:<\/p>\n<p>In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. . . .<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the <span>Lord<\/span> Almighty!”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.” (<span>nlt<\/span>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Here we have an account of the visionary presence of a prophet in the heavenly council; in this case, however, the prophet participates in the deliberations and thereby receives a prophetic commission. Though few prophets have left accounts of their divine commissions, most of them appear to have been conscious of having been “sent” by God (Is 48:16; Hos 8:1; Am 7:14-15). According to Jeremiah, false prophets did not receive such divine commissions (Jer 23:21, 32; 28:15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMessageoftheProphets\">The Message of the Prophets<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The most common introductory formula for prophetic oracles in the OT is the phrase “Thus says the Lord,” which occurs hundreds of times in prophetic contexts. This formula clearly implies that the pronouncement so introduced is not the word of the prophet who utters the oracle but of the God of Israel who delivered his word to his prophet. The use of this formula also reiterates the prophet’s sense of divine commission. In oracles introduced in this manner, God speaks in the first person. In fact, virtually all Israelite prophetic utterance is formulated as the direct speech of the God of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets used many literary forms in which to express their oracles. Two of the more widely used forms of prophetic speech are the judgment speech and the oracle of salvation. The judgment speech is composed of at least two central elements: the speech of rebuke or invective, and the pronouncement of judgment (see 2 Kgs 1:3-4). The second common prophetic speech form is the oracle of salvation (see Is 41:8-13). Other fixed forms of prophetic speech include the prophecy of salvation (43:14-21), the proclamation of salvation (41:17-20; 42:14-17; 43:16-21; 49:7-12), and the woe oracle (Is 5:8-10; 10:1-4; Am 5:18-24; 6:1-7; Mi 2:1-5).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of the Message<\/h5>\n<p>The common adage that OT prophets were not “foretellers” but “forthtellers” is not strictly correct. All of the prophets predict the future. Such prediction, however, is based not on human curiosity of what the future will hold but rather is rooted in the future consequences of past or present violations of the covenant, or on a future act of deliverance that will provide hope for a discouraged people. Most of the prophetic speeches that have been preserved in the OT were originally delivered as public proclamations or sermons. Most of these prophetic proclamations were evoked by the iniquity and apostasy of Israel. Hosea and Jeremiah condemned Israel because she had broken the covenant (Jer 11:2-3; Hos 8:1).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets are frequently associated with social justice and social reform, and these elements were unquestionably an important dimension of their message. Amos denounced the rich who afflicted the poor (Am 2:6-8; 4:1; 5:11; 8:4-6). He railed against sexual immorality (2:6-8) and against those who take bribes (5:12). Hosea provided a list of prevalent vices, including lying, killing, stealing, adultery, and idolatry (Hos 4:2). Idolatry was a particular target for his denunciations (8:5; 11:2). The background for such heated denunciations of Israel’s behavior is God’s unquenchable love for Israel (Is 43:4; Jer 31:3; Hos 3:1; 11:1-4; 14:4; Mal 1:2), which is inseparable from his election of Israel (Is 43:1; Jer 33:24; Ez 20:5; Hos 3).<\/p>\n<p>The prophets were concerned not only with the transgressions of Israel and the historical judgment that would inevitably follow but also with the achievement of a final future time of bliss. The message of many of the prophets is thoroughly eschatological (i.e., pertaining to the end times). One such eschatological concept is that of the Day of the Lord. The concept of the Day of the Lord first appears in Amos, where the emphasis lies on the disaster that will befall Israel on that day. Amos’s emphasis on disaster notwithstanding, the Day of the Lord is a conception that had both salvific as well as judgmental overtones for Israel. While the disaster that will occur in the Day of the Lord can be viewed in terms of a literal historical fulfillment in the tragic events of 722 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Samaria) and 586 <span>BC<\/span> (the fall of Judah), there are nevertheless features of these predictions that transcend historical fulfillment and reach toward eschatological fulfillment.<\/p>\n<p>Since the Israelite conception of “salvation” was largely temporal in its dimensions, it included such blessings as length of life, fruitfulness of the womb and field, peace and victory over one’s enemies, the abundance of water, and so on. In harmony with this conception of salvation, the future age is conceived in precisely those terms, as in Amos 9:13-15.<\/p>\n<p>The prophets pictured a time when David himself, or someone very much like him, would return and inaugurate a golden era reminiscent of the great Davidic and Solomonic period. The covenant of God with David was not a conditional covenant but rather one that was absolutely inviolable (2 Sm 7:4-17; Ps 89; Jer 33:19-22), and it was with this knowledge that the prophets could look forward confidently to a restoration of David’s throne (Jer 17:24-26; 23:5-6; 33:14-15).<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProphecyintheNewTestament\">Prophecy in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the few self-proclaimed prophets of the intertestamental period, early Christianity began with a flurry of prophetic activity that lasted well into the second century <span>AD<\/span>. Jesus, his disciples and followers, and the early Christians were convinced that the times in which they lived were times in which OT prophecy was being fulfilled (Mk 1:14-15; Acts 2:16-21; Rom 16:25-27; 1 Cor 10:11). Yet this era was not only one of fulfillment but also one of the renewal of the prophetic gift.<\/p>\n<h5>John the Baptist<\/h5>\n<p>John the Baptist is remembered in the NT primarily as the forerunner of Jesus whose coming was predicted by Malachi (Mal 4:5-6). Yet, in his own right, John proclaimed the imminent judgment of God with a flair of denunciation and rebuke reminiscent of the OT prophets. John’s costume, consisting of a hairy cloak and a leather girdle (Mk 1:6), was reminiscent of the typical garb of OT prophets (1 Kgs 19:19; 2 Kgs 1:8; 2:13-14; Zec 13:4). John was regarded as a prophet by people everywhere (Mt 14:5; 17:10-13; Mk 9:11-13; 11:32; Lk 1:76; 7:26). Luke reports, in a style similar to the OT prophetic narratives, that “the word of God came to John” (Lk 3:2). Two short prophetic speeches have been preserved in Matthew 3:7-10 (cf. Lk 3:7-9) and Mark 1:7-8 (cf. Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:15-18). In the first speech, John denounced those of his generation who had transgressed the covenant law and exhorted them to change their manner of life. In the second speech, John predicted the coming of the Mighty One, Jesus (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:7; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:15, 27, 30; Acts 13:25). John’s style, however, was not precisely that of the OT prophets. His pronouncements were made on his own authority; never did he use formulas such as “thus says the Lord,” or present his prophetic utterances as if they were speeches made by God. Yet, in spite of these differences, John is appropriately regarded as the last representative of the OT prophetic tradition (Mt 11:13; Lk 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus of Nazareth<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was popularly regarded as a prophet (Mt 16:14; 21:10-11; Mk 6:14-15; 8:28; Lk 7:16, 39; 9:8, 19; Jn 6:14; 7:40, 52). This assessment was based as much on the mighty deeds Jesus performed as on his prophetic speeches and predictions. Though Jesus nowhere claimed prophetic status directly, that claim is implicit in Mark 6:4: “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown” (cf. Mt 13:57; Lk 4:24). It is implicit as well in Luke 13:33: “Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). In Acts, Jesus is regarded as “the prophet like Moses” predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18 (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Matthew presents Jesus as the New Moses, but he does not particularly emphasize his prophetic role. John, however, like Luke, emphasizes Jesus’ role as the prophet (Jn 4:19; 6:14-15; 7:40).<\/p>\n<p>While the Gospels and Acts reflect the notion that Jesus was a prophet, they also emphasize the fact that he was much more than a prophet. Nevertheless, the notion of prophetism was sufficiently important in early Judaism that Jesus’ recognition as a prophet is very significant. There are 12 solid reasons for regarding Jesus as a prophet in the OT tradition: (1) The sovereign authority of Jesus’ teaching (Mk 1:27), a feature underlined by his use of the introductory formula “(Amen) I say to you,” which is reminiscent of the formula “thus says the Lord” used by the OT prophets. (2) The poetic character of many of Jesus’ sayings is unlike contemporary rabbinic teaching but is similar to the poetic rhetoric of the OT prophets. (3) Jesus experienced visions (Lk 10:18) like the ancient prophets. (4) Jesus, like the prophets, made many predictions (Mt 23:38; Mk 13:2; 14:58; Lk 13:35; etc.). (5) Like the OT prophets, Jesus performed symbolic acts (such as the cleansing of the temple, the entry into Jerusalem, and the Last Supper). (6) Jesus, like the prophets, when necessary, rejected the formal observance of religious ritual and emphasized the moral and spiritual dimensions of obedience to God. (7) Jesus announced the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God—an eschatological proclamation similar to those made by the prophets. (8) Like the OT prophets, Jesus functioned as a preacher of repentance. (9) Jesus, like many of the prophets, was conscious of a special calling of God (Mt 15:24; Mk 8:31; 9:37; 14:36; Lk 4:18-26). (10) Jesus, like the prophets, received divine revelation through intimate communion with God (Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22). (11) Like the prophets, Jesus represented God; to obey him was to obey God, to reject him was to reject God (Mk 9:37; cf. Ez 33:30-33). (12) Like the prophets, Jesus was conscious of a mission to all Israel (Mt 15:24; 19:28; Lk 22:30).<\/p>\n<p>Among the many prophetic predictions of Jesus are the following:<\/p>\n<p>1. Predictions of the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God (Mt 10:7-8, 23; 23:39; Mk 1:15; 9:1; 13:28-29)<\/p>\n<li>2. Predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Mt 23:37-39; 24:2; 26:61; 27:40; Mk 13:2; 14:58; 15:29; Lk 13:34-35; 21:6; Jn 2:19-21)<\/li>\n<li>3. Predictions of the coming of the Son of Man (Mt 10:23, 32-33; 12:40; 13:40-41; 16:27; 24:27, 37-39; Mk 8:38; 13:26-27; 14:62; Lk 9:26; 11:30; 12:8-9; 17:24, 26)<\/li>\n<li>4. Predictions of the end of the age. The longest prophetic section in the Gospels is the eschatological discourse of Jesus in Mark 13:1-32 (cf. Mt 24:1-36; Lk 21:5-33), in which a number of predictions concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age are woven into a lengthy discourse to the disciples.<\/li>\n<h5>Prophecy as a Gift for the Believers<\/h5>\n<p>The beginning of prophetic activity in early Christianity, according to Acts, coincided with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the earliest Christians on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-21). Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost indicates that the outpouring of the Spirit fulfilled Joel’s prophecy (Acts 2:4, 17-21; cf. Jl 2:28-32). Further, since the Spirit had been poured out upon all early Christians (that Spirit being a Spirit of prophecy), all are actual or potential prophets.<\/p>\n<p>According to 1 Corinthians 12:28 (see also Rom 12:6; Eph 4:11), God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, and third teachers. The names of several early Christian prophets have been preserved. These include Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11); Judas and Silas (15:32); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Paul (13:1); and the four virgin daughters of Philip the evangelist (21:8-9). John, the author of Revelation, was certainly a prophet (Rv 1:3; 22:9, 18), though he never directly assumed that title.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRoleoftheChristianProphet\">The Role of the Christian Prophet<\/p>\n<p>Christian prophets were leaders in early Christian communities (1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11), who exercised their gift in church gatherings (Acts 13:1-3; 11:27-28; 1 Cor 12–14; Rv 1:10). Since the Spirit of God was particularly active in Christian worship, prophecy was a major means whereby God communicated with his people. Prophets, like apostles and teachers, did not hold offices in local communities like bishops, elders, and deacons. Rather, they were chosen, not by individual congregations, but by divine commission and so were honored and accepted in all local communities.<\/p>\n<p>Early Christian prophets were both itinerant and settled, though itinerant prophets seem to have been more prevalent in Syria-Palestine and Asia Minor than in the European churches.<\/p>\n<h5>The Function of Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>According to Paul, the central purpose of prophecy (as of all other spiritual gifts) is that of building up or edifying the church. According to 1 Corinthians 14:3, “one who prophesies is helping others grow in the Lord, encouraging and comforting them” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Again, in 1 Corinthians 14:4, Paul states that the “one who speaks a word of prophecy strengthens the entire church.” Paul discussed the subject of spiritual gifts, particularly tongues speaking and prophecy, because the Corinthians had placed an excessive emphasis on speaking in tongues. Paul did not object to speaking in tongues (1 Cor 14:18, 39), but he did point out that, since it was generally incomprehensible, the church could not be edified by it. Prophecy, which consisted of comprehensible speech inspired by the Spirit, contributed to the mutual edification, encouragement, and consolation of all present (1 Cor 14:20-25, 39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Content of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>We know only a little about the content of prophecies uttered in the first-century church. Prophetic utterance occasionally provided divine guidance in making important decisions in early Christianity. Through a prophetic utterance, Paul and Barnabas were selected for a particular mission (Acts 13:1-3; cf. 1 Tm 1:18; 4:14). Probably through prophetic utterance, Paul and Timothy were forbidden to preach the gospel in Asia (Acts 16:6), and they were similarly forbidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia (v 7). Perhaps the most frequent use of prophecy is the prediction of the future. Agabus predicted a universal famine (11:28) and the imminent arrest of Paul (21:11). Other prophets had also predicted his impending imprisonment (20:23). The prophecies contained in the Revelation of John are all oriented toward the future events that will gradually unfold in the last days. Yet the purpose of John’s elaborate prophecy is not to satisfy the curiosity of his audience but rather to comfort and encourage them in the midst of persecution.<\/p>\n<h5>The Form of Christian Prophecy<\/h5>\n<p>Unlike the prophets of the OT, Christian prophets did not always present their message in the form of a direct speech from God or Jesus. There are few, if any, formal indicators of the presence of prophetic speech in early Christian literature. The book of Revelation is one notable exception.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dreams; Oracle; Promise; Prophet, Prophetess; Prophets, False; Visions.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","summary_en":"PROPHECY Term, along with its English cognates (“prophet,” “to prophesy,” “prophetism,” and “prophetic”), derived from a group of Greek words that, in secular Greek, mean “speak forth,” “proclaim,” “announce.” In biblical Greek, however, these terms always carry the connotation of speaking, proclaiming, or announcing something under the influence of spiritual inspiration. Preview • Prophecy in the Old Testament • Types of Old Testament Prophets • The Message of the Prophets • Prophecy in the ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35874,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":55341,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:38","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","summary_en":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82967,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:38","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","summary_en":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110593,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:38","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","summary_en":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":138219,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Marcu 8:38","title_en":"Study Note: Marcu 8:38","content_ro":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>8:38<\/strong> When Jesus, as <em>the Son of Man<\/em>, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","summary_en":"8:38 When Jesus, as the Son of Man, returns in glory to judge the world, he will be ashamed of those who were ashamed to be identified with him and his message (cp. Matt 7:21-23; 10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; 2 Tim 2:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64944,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65337,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65479,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65567,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92570,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92963,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93105,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93193,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120196,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120589,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120731,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120819,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147822,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148215,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","title_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of God’s Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized:<\/p>\n<li>The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21).<\/li>\n<li>Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrated by Jesus’ exorcisms (Mark 1:21-28; 5:1-20; Luke 11:20).<\/li>\n<li>The new covenant promised in Jer 31:31-34 would be established (Mark 14:24).<\/li>\n<li>The resurrection from the dead would produce its firstfruits (Mark 8:31; 9:9, 31; 10:33-34; 16:6; 1 Cor 15:20, 23).<\/li>\n<li>God’s Anointed, the promised Son of David (Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:25-38) would arrive.<\/li>\n<p>These dimensions of God’s Kingdom have already been fulfilled in the birth, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. People are to repent and believe the gospel because God’s Kingdom has arrived in the person of Jesus (Matt 4:23; 6:10; Mark 1:14-15; 4:26-32; Luke 4:42-43).<\/p>\n<p>With the coming of the Kingdom through Jesus, things radically changed in Israel. The Spirit was once again active in the land, working through the prophet John the Baptist and in the ministry of Jesus. For those with eyes to see, the promised Messiah, or Christ, had appeared. Because God’s Kingdom was with them in the person of Jesus, the disciples could not fast like the Pharisees and the disciples of John the Baptist (Mark 2:18-20). Fasting became inappropriate, for the Old Testament promises were being fulfilled. It was time to celebrate and feast (Mark 2:19-20), because God’s reign had begun. People were already entering into the Kingdom (Mark 10:23-31) and experiencing its manifestations (Mark 9:1).<\/p>\n<p>There is a future, not-yet-realized dimension of God’s Kingdom that awaits Christ’s return (Mark 14:25). The ultimate judgment of evil, the final establishment of justice, and the eradication of disease, poverty, and even death will find their fulfillment when Jesus, the Son of Man, returns in glory, gathers his elect (Mark 13:24-27; Titus 2:11-14), judges the world (Mark 8:38; 14:62; Matt 25:31-46; 2 Tim 4:1; Rev 14:14-20), and resurrects the dead (1 Cor 15:12-57; 1 Thes 4:13–5:11). Although the time of Christ’s return is unknown (Mark 13:32), his followers are to be alert and watch for his coming (13:33-37) in anticipation of their blessed hope (Titus 2:13).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jer 31:31-34; Joel 2:28-32; Matt 4:23; 5:3; 6:10; 25:31-46; Mark 1:14-15; 4:11, 26-32; 8:31-38; 9:1, 47; 10:23-25, 29-31; 13:24-27, 32-37; 14:25, 62; Luke 2:25-38; 4:18-19, 42-43; 6:20; 10:18-20; 11:20; Acts 1:6-8; 2:16-21; 1 Cor 15:22-28; Titus 2:11-14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","summary_en":"The Coming of God’s Kingdom A central component of Jesus’ message was that God’s Kingdom had arrived. The arrival of God’s Kingdom was eagerly awaited by the people of Israel, for it would fulfill the many promises of God that had not yet been realized: The Spirit would not only come again, as he had in the past, but he would come upon each individual believer in fulfillment of Joel 2:28-32 (cp. Acts 2:16-21). Satan would be defeated (Mark 3:27; Luke 10:17-18), as was already being demonstrat...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148357,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Following Jesus","title_en":"Following Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Following Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p>For everyone, following Jesus requires a total commitment to turn from selfish ways (Mark 8:34-35). Taking up one’s cross is a metaphor for giving up one’s life to follow Jesus—even to death. For example, Peter, Andrew, James, and John left their homes and their source of income to follow Jesus (Mark 1:16-20). For one rich man, turning from his selfish ways required selling all he had and giving the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10:21). Following Jesus also means being identified with him without being ashamed and being faithful to him and his teachings (Mark 8:38; cp. Rom 10:9). It requires removing anything that would interfere with following Jesus, regardless of how painful doing so might be (Mark 9:43-48). It requires entrusting one’s life entirely to Jesus and repenting of sin (Mark 1:15; 6:12). It even requires putting loyalty to Jesus above loyalty to one’s own father and mother (Matt 10:37; Luke 14:26).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus explicitly commanded his disciples to proclaim his message (Matt 28:18-20; Luke 24:47-49; Acts 1:8). And we see throughout the rest of the New Testament that Jesus’ followers did indeed proclaim the Good News wherever they went, leading to more and more followers (see Acts 2:14-41; 3:12-26; 4:1-2, 20; 8:4; 9:20; 11:19-26; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:14-15; 15:18-21; 1 Cor 9:16; Col 1:23; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Tim 4:2).<\/p>\n<p>Alongside Jesus’ demands for discipleship are the rewards of following Jesus. Those who follow Jesus are promised entrance into the Kingdom of God (Mark 9:43-48; 10:23-31). They receive his forgiveness for their sins (Mark 2:10-11; see also 3:28; 11:25), and they become members of the family of God (John 1:12). They are saved from judgment (Mark 8:35; 13:13) and obtain eternal life (Mark 9:43; 10:29-30; 1 Jn 5:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Hos 6:3; Matt 10:37-39; 28:18-20; Mark 1:15-20; 2:14-15; 3:13-15; 5:18-20; 6:6-13, 30-32; 8:34-38; 9:38-50; 10:17-31; 11:22-25; 13:9-13; Luke 14:25-35; 24:47-49; John 8:12; 10:27; 12:26; Acts 1:8; 2:42-47; 4:16-20; 8:4; 9:19-30; 11:19-24; 13:1-3; Rom 1:1-16; 10:7-15; 1 Cor 9:16; Eph 5:1; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","summary_en":"Following Jesus One of the core purposes of the Gospels is to help readers understand and accept the call to take up their cross and follow Jesus. This call is addressed not only to those who would be Jesus’ apostles (Mark 3:13-19; cp. 1:16-20; 2:14) but to all who desired to follow him (Mark 8:34; cp. 2:15; 10:21, 52). For some, the call to discipleship is very hard (Mark 10:17-25), but God provides grace (10:27). Others find it easy to respond to Jesus’ call (Mark 2:14; cp. Luke 7:36-50). F...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148445,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Day Is Coming","title_en":"The Day Is Coming","content_ro":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Day Is Coming<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written.<\/p>\n<p>The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community must continue to live in faithful watchfulness after this event for the Son of God’s return in glory, which might be soon (Mark 13:34-37).<\/p>\n<p>The third event that Jesus predicted was his own future return (Matt 23:39; 24:3, 29-31, 24:36–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:24-27, 32-37; Luke 21:25-36; John 14:1-3). References to Jesus’ return can be found throughout the New Testament (see, e.g., 1 Cor 1:7-8; 3:13; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 1 Thes 5:1-11; 2 Thes 2:2; 2 Tim 1:12, 18; 4:1, 8).<\/p>\n<p>When Jesus returns, the promises about God’s Kingdom will be completely fulfilled. Jesus will bring judgment and destruction for Satan and his angels (Rom 16:20; 2 Thes 2:3-12). Unbelievers will also experience eternal judgment (Matt 13:40-42; 25:31-46; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; Acts 10:42; Eph 5:6; Col 3:6; Heb 10:25; 2 Pet 3:7; Jude 1:6; Rev 1:7; 6:14, 17). Meanwhile, the faithful will be resurrected to experience the joy of eternal life (1 Thes 4:13-18). God will gather his chosen people for salvation (Mark 13:27; Heb 1:14; 9:27-28), grace (1 Pet 1:13), and glory (1 Thes 2:12; 2 Thes 2:14; 1 Pet 1:7; 5:1, 4). He will give his people a priceless inheritance (1 Pet 1:4) and new eternal bodies (1 Cor 15:35-57; Phil 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18). All of creation will also be rescued from its curse (Gen 3:17-18) and be transformed (Rom 8:20-23; 2 Pet 3:12-13; Rev 21:1–22:5). Sorrow, tears, mourning, and death will no longer exist (Rev 21:4). Those who have had faith during this life will see God (Matt 5:8; Rev 22:3).<\/p>\n<p>In light of these promises, believers in Jesus are to prayerfully await his return (Matt 6:10; Rev 22:20). We should not speculate on dates for his coming (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7), but should live in a way that is honorable (1 Jn 2:28) and be prepared (Matt 24:36–25:30; 1 Thes 5:1-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 5:8; 6:10; 13:41-42; 23:39; 24:3–25:46; Mark 8:38; 13:1-37; 14:25; Luke 6:24-26; 16:19-31; 19:41-44; 21:5-36; John 14:1-3; Acts 1:6-7; 10:42; Rom 8:20-23; 16:20; 1 Cor 1:7-8; 15:35-58; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16; 3:21; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 2 Thes 2:2-14; 2 Tim 4:1-8; Titus 2:11-13; Heb 9:28; 10:25, 37; 1 Pet 1:7, 13; 5:1-4; 2 Pet 3:7-13; 1 Jn 2:28; Rev 1:7; 6:15-17; 21:1–22:7; 22:12, 20<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","summary_en":"The Day Is Coming Jesus predicted three future events in the synoptic Gospels. One was his own death and resurrection (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34); this was a past event when the Gospels were written. The second event that Jesus predicted was the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-28; 13:1-23; Luke 19:41-44; 21:5-24). This event was probably about to happen when Mark wrote his Gospel (see Mark Book Introduction, “Date”). It would not signify the very end, so the Christian community m...","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 8
— 38 versete
Marcu 8
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse