Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":42043,"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":42201,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69669,"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":69827,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97295,"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":97453,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124921,"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":125079,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"The Sadducees","title_en":"The Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Sadducees<\/h3>\n<p>The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6;<em> War<\/em> 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). The term <em>Sadducee<\/em> probably derives from <em>Zadok,<\/em> the high priest during the reigns of David (2 Sam 8:17; 15:24; 1 Kgs 1:8) and Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-48); both words have the same Hebrew root. The earliest historical reference to the Sadducees occurs during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>), a descendant of the Maccabees (Josephus, <em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6), but it is clear from this account that they had already existed for some time.<\/p>\n<p>Their theological views are often contrasted with those of the Pharisees (Acts 23:8; see also Acts 4:1-2). The Pentateuch had primary authority for the Sadducees. They rejected the oral tradition so cherished by the Pharisees. Also in contrast with the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead (see Matt 22:23-33), angelic beings (see Acts 23:8), or the concept of final judgment. The Pharisees, by contrast, were so committed to belief in the resurrection that they sided with Paul against the Sadducees when he was on trial for disturbing the Temple (Acts 23:6-10).<\/p>\n<p>Despite their differences, the Pharisees and Sadducees united with a single front against Jesus. If the Pharisees opposed Jesus because he made light of their oral traditions, the Sadducees opposed Jesus because he affirmed the supernatural world of angels and demons and appealed to a final judgment and resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>With the destruction of the Temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees disappeared from the scene. They left no written records. Since all our information about the Sadducees comes from their opponents, we have a limited idea of what they were really like.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 3:7; 16:1-12; 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-40; Acts 4:1-2; 5:17-18; 23:6-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","summary_en":"The Sadducees The Sadducees were made up of the priestly class (in contrast to the lay movement of the Pharisees). The Sadducees probably lived in the vicinity of Jerusalem and controlled the Temple system (Acts 4:1-2; 5:17). They were powerful aristocrats and mediators between Rome and Israel (see Josephus, Antiquities 13.10.6; War 2.10.5). They did not have great favor or influence with the people (Josephus, Antiquities 18.1.4). The term Sadducee probably derives from Zadok, the high priest...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":2418,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Apothegm*","title_en":"Apothegm*","content_ro":"<h3>APOTHEGM*<\/h3>\n<p>Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, and in the correction of false teachings, they were of great interest to the early church.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>APOTHEGM*<\/h3>\n<p>Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, and in the correction of false teachings, they were of great interest to the early church.<\/p>","summary_ro":"APOTHEGM* Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, a...","summary_en":"APOTHEGM* Short, pithy saying. As used by some biblical scholars, the term “apothegm” denotes brief stories in the Gospels that culminate in a saying of Jesus (e.g., Mt 8:18-22; 9:10-13; 16:1-4; Mk 2:18-22; 10:13-15; Lk 6:1-5; 11:37-44). Also known as “pronouncement stories,” the apothegmata (plural) are devoid of a larger historical setting and contain only enough detail to make the saying of Jesus intelligible. Because such stories were used in worship, in the education of new Christians, a...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11828,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Faith","title_en":"Faith","content_ro":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAITH<\/h3>\n<p>Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionofFaith\">Definition of Faith<\/p>\n<p>In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a whole and embodied in personal life. In 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul witnesses to having “kept the faith.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheOldTestament\">Faith in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT also strongly emphasizes faith as confidence in God’s covenant or in the covenant God made with Abraham and his descendants. The call of Abraham and the promise that his descendants would be used in the history of redemption became the basis of the narratives of the OT, being seen as the working out of that covenant. Once the nation Israel was brought into being, God sustained and protected it. The exodus from Egypt is a prominent indication that God was at work restoring his people to the Promised Land. The obedience of the people of God as the proper expression of faith is seen clearly in the OT. Without seeing God, his people believed and obeyed him. Abraham left his native land to go into unknown territory. The people of Israel left Egypt following the leadership of God to a land they could not see. The promise of God gave them courage to possess the land promised to them. After the exodus, the covenant of Abraham was confirmed with the people of Israel by the sprinkling of blood (Ex 24:6-7). There was to be strict obedience to God’s commands as an expression of faith. This response of human faith to the Lord’s faithfulness was national and collective. There also were commands to, and instances of, personal faith.<\/p>\n<p>Not only the narrative and legal portions of the OT but also the poetic and prophetic writings emphasize faith. The Psalms abound in expressions of personal confidence in the Lord even in dark times. Habakkuk points out that “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Hb 2:4). From such instances it is clear that, as the Lord’s education of Israel proceeded, the matter of faith in God’s faithfulness became more and more a matter of individual and personal response, and it is in the Prophets that several ingredients—such as trust, obedience, fear, and certainty—blend into the understanding of such personal faith.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"FaithintheNewTestament\">Faith in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>As over against the OT, where the accent is on the faithfulness of God, in the NT the emphasis is placed on the active, responding faith of the hearer to the promised, final revelation in the Messiah, Jesus. Both verb and noun regularly describe the adequate response of people to Jesus’ word and to the gospel.<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of the synoptic Gospels (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>) is the use of faith without identifying its object: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed” (Mt 17:20); “When Jesus saw their faith” (Mk 2:5); “Your faith has saved you” (Lk 7:50). Jesus is portrayed as one who by his work and word opens the door to faith and makes faith possible. The question is not whether the faith is in Jesus or in the Father; the implication is undoubtedly both, but as with every true bearer of the Word of God, the eye of faith is turned to the One who sends.<\/p>\n<p>On more than one occasion, Jesus denies the request for a miracle to substantiate his words (Mt 12:38-39; 16:1-4). Faith is response to the Word alone without any supporting props. No sign is to be given but the sign of Jonah. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:19-31), Jesus denies the request for the spectacular and insists that the hearer must respond to the word given to him (cf. Jn 20:29). The Word demands self-surrender and commitment. Hence, the very nature of the Word and of faith becomes an obstacle to the proud and the powerful.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is the medium by which the power of God is made visible. It moves mountains, heals the sick, and is the means of entrance into the kingdom. It may be mingled with doubt, as with the father who sought healing for his son (“I believe; help my unbelief!” [Mk 9:24]), or as with John the Baptist in prison, who, even with his doubts, was confirmed by Jesus as the greatest of the offspring of woman (Mt 11:2-15). Peter’s (and the other disciples’) perception was faulty, but Jesus affirms Peter’s confession as the foundation stone of the church. The synoptic Gospels portray the early faith of the disciples in all its limitations and weaknesses, yet it is still faith in that it is their positive response to Jesus’ word and work.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fourth Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>Faith is an especially significant concept in the Gospel of John (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), though the word (in the Greek) occurs only as a verb. Quite often the reference has to do with the acceptance that something is true, that is, simple credence, or belief: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me” (Jn 14:11); “If you believed Moses, you would believe me” (Jn 5:46).<\/p>\n<p>Even more significant is the special expression “to believe into” in the sense of putting one’s trust into another. The particular form of the expression is without parallel before the fourth Gospel and may well express the strong sense of personal trust in the eternal Word made flesh. In John 3:16, whoever puts trust in him has eternal life. Those who put their trust in him are given power to become sons of God—to be born of God (Jn 1:12). They will never thirst (6:35); they will live, even though they die (11:25).<\/p>\n<p>In other places, John speaks of trust or faith in an absolute sense, that is, without referring to the one in whom trust is placed. In John 11:15 Jesus arrives after the death of Lazarus and is glad “in order that you might believe.” The outcome is going to be faith. Similarly, in the prologue (1:7), John the Baptist bears witness in order that through him all might believe. As Jesus satisfies the doubt of Thomas concerning the resurrection, he says, “Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe” (20:29). In these and other passages the fundamental outcome of Jesus’ witness to himself is trust.<\/p>\n<p>Faith and knowledge are closely related. In John 6:69 Peter says, “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” In his priestly prayer Jesus says that eternal life is to “know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” (Jn 17:3). Also, God is seen through the eyes of faith. No one has ever seen God, but the Only Begotten has revealed him (1:18). He who has seen Jesus has seen the Father (14:9).<\/p>\n<p>To believe is also expressed in the verb “receive.” Those who receive Christ are given power to become the sons of God (Jn 1:12). Trust is that form of knowing or seeing by which the glory of God (1:14; 17:4) is made present.<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In Paul’s letters (quoted below from the <span>rsv<\/span>), he writes about faith from a number of angles. He sets faith over against “works of the law” as the only and true basis for righteousness (Rom 1–4; Gal 1–4) and appeals to Abraham to prove his point: “Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Gn 15:6; cf. Rom 4:5; Gal 3:6). This is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21); righteousness is the gift of God through faith in Christ, specifically in his atoning work. Behind Paul’s conviction lies his awareness of the radical and pervasive sinfulness of humans that renders each one helpless. Humanity is dead in sin but is made alive by faith in the word and work of Jesus mediated through the gospel.<\/p>\n<p>Faith, then, is faith in Jesus Christ. The number of metaphors Paul employs to describe the consequences of faith is staggering. It is by faith that believers are justified (Rom 5:1), reconciled (2 Cor 5:18), redeemed (Eph 1:7), made alive (2:5), adopted into the family of God (Rom 8:15-16), re-created (2 Cor 5:17), transported into a new kingdom (Col 1:13), and set free (Gal 5:1). Faith is, for Paul, the <em>sine qua non<\/em> of every aspect of salvation, from the grace that convicts to the receiving of the full inheritance at the coming of the Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s letters, faith is bound up with love so that the great exponent of justification by faith becomes also the articulate exponent of distinctive Christian love. To say that faith is indispensable to salvation is only part of the truth, for faith expresses itself through love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love” (Gal 5:6); “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing” (1 Cor 13:2). Love is both the genesis and the ultimate expression of faith. Hence, even for Paul there can be no <em>total<\/em> separation between faith and works. This love of which Paul speaks is the essential fruit of the Spirit through whom the life of faith is lived. Only by virtue of the indwelling Spirit does faith find expression in love.<\/p>\n<h5>General Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>James speaks of faith as being completed by works (Jas 2:22). He opposed that concept of faith that thinks primarily of creedal assent, of believing that something is true without acting upon it. James, like Paul, assumes the primacy of faith, but he is warning against those who would draw wrong conclusions. Faith apart from works is not faith; it is barren (v 20). The practical dimension of faith is the burden of much of this epistle.<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Hebrews recognizes that faith has always been characteristic of the people of God and their specially called leaders. Faith makes substantial what is otherwise nebulous and uncertain; it makes evidential what is not visible. By faith the people of God have a more certain ground for their lives and their actions than the world is able to discern (Heb 11:1). The great cloud of witnesses (12:1) bear testimony by their faith to the faithfulness of God.<\/p>\n<p>Faith is opened up by the Word of God, finds expression through the Holy Spirit who is given, and bears witness to the lordship of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","summary_en":"FAITH Belief in that which has no tangible proof; trust in God. Definition of Faith In the OT and NT, “faith” carries several meanings. It may mean simple trust in God or in the Word of God, and at other times faith almost becomes equivalent to active obedience. It may also find expression in the affirmation of a creedal statement. Thus, it also comes to mean the entire body of received Christian teaching or truth—“the truth.” In Colossians 2:7, the term suggests something to be accepted as a...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19512,"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":24784,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33496,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sadducees","title_en":"Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","summary_en":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35331,"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":54808,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","summary_en":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82434,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","summary_en":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110060,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","summary_en":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137686,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:1-12<\/strong> Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","summary_en":"16:1-12 Having been warmly received in the Gentile world, Jesus returned to his fellow countrymen only to encounter further rejection.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65136,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92762,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120388,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148014,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":7123,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Color","title_en":"Color","content_ro":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\n<p>The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\n<p>The word most frequently translated “colour” in the <span>kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the <span>rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the <span>rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, <span>kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Though many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ColorsMentionedintheBible\">Colors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Because the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the <span>rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\n<p>Colors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n<p>“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n<p>“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n<p>“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n<p>“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\n<p>Another word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n<p>“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>References to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n<p>“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n<p> “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COLOR<\/h3>\n<p>The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages.<\/p>\n<p>The word most frequently translated “colour” in the <span>kjv<\/span> literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the <span>rsv<\/span>. Other words translated as “color” in the <span>rsv<\/span> refer to facial appearance (Dn 5:6-10; 7:28), fabrics of variegated colors (Prv 7:16; Ez 17:3; 27:24), stones (1 Chr 29:2), and breastplates (Rv 9:17). Joseph’s “coat of many colours” (Gn 37:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) and Tamar’s “garment of divers colours” (2 Sm 13:18-19, <span>kjv<\/span>) were either long-sleeved robes or richly ornamented tunics that served as a mark of preferred status.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, a word that means “pretense” is used archaically in Acts 27:30 and was interpreted as “colour” by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators. They also added the word “colour” to Revelation 17:4, evidently to clarify the meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Though many colors are mentioned in the Bible, colors are not particularly singled out for emphasis. Natural colors are seldom mentioned in descriptions. Colors that appear frequently and that are most carefully differentiated are manufactured colors, especially dyes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ColorsMentionedintheBible\">Colors Mentioned in the Bible<\/p>\n<p>Because the Hebrews perceived color differently than we do in Western culture, it is sometimes difficult to translate precisely the various Hebrew words denoting colors. Thus there is often a wide variation in translations of such words in English Bibles. To provide a base for comparison, this article will follow the <span>rsv<\/span> except as noted.<\/p>\n<p>Colors mentioned most often in the OT and NT are the following:<\/p>\n<p>“Black” is the translation of five words in the OT and one in the NT, expressing varying degrees of darkness. The words describe the color of lambs (Gn 30:32-33, 35, 40), hair (Lv 13:31, 37; Sg 5:11; Mt 5:36), skin (Jb 30:30), horses (Zec 6:2, 6; Rv 6:5), the sky (1 Kgs 18:45; Is 50:3; Jer 4:28), the day (Jb 3:5; Mi 3:6), the darkened sun (Rv 6:12), and an invading army (Jl 2:2). Job’s “blackness” (Jb 30:28) has been understood as disease or sadness.<\/p>\n<p>“Blue” probably refers to a blue-purple dye obtained from Mediterranean mollusks. A popular color, it was considered less desirable in antiquity than “royal” purple. Both dyes were produced in Tyre, which at one time had a monopoly on the manufacture of blue and purple dye (2 Chr 2:7, 14; Ez 27:24). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7). Blue was used in the tabernacle fabrics (Ex 26:1; Nm 4:6-9), the priests’ garments (Ex 28:5-6), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14), and in the Persian court (Est 1:6; 8:15). Blue is not mentioned in the NT.<\/p>\n<p>“Crimson” is the English translation of three different Hebrew words. This red color of varying shades was derived from certain insects. The word describes certain fabrics in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7, 14; 3:14) and was used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). The word translated “crimsoned” to describe garments from Bozrah (63:1) probably means “vivid colors” rather than a specific hue.<\/p>\n<p>“Gray,” a color found only in the OT, is used exclusively to describe old age—as in gray hair or gray-headed (Gn 42:38; 44:29-31; Dt 32:25; 1 Sm 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Jb 15:10; Ps 71:18; Prv 20:29; Is 46:4; Hos 7:9). A different word used to describe dappled gray horses (Zec 6:3) probably means “spotted” or “speckled.”<\/p>\n<p>“Green” translates seven words in the OT and two in the NT. Most of the words refer to vegetation and are descriptive of the fresh or moist condition of plants rather than their color. The following are described as “green”: plants (Gn 1:30), trees (1 Kgs 14:23), branches (Jb 15:32), pastures (Ps 23:2; Jl 2:22), herbs (Ps 37:2), olive trees (Ps 52:8; Jer 11:16), thorns (Ps 58:9), leaves (Jer 17:8), grass (Mk 6:39; Rv 8:7), and wood (Lk 23:31). In addition to various plants, a dove’s wing (Ps 68:13), a couch (Sg 1:16), and a righteous person (Ps 92:14) are also described as “green.” Idolatrous worship practices took place under “every green tree” (Dt 12:2; 2 Kgs 16:4; Is 57:5; Jer 2:20; Ez 6:13), although the word actually describes the luxurious growth of the leaves rather than their color.<\/p>\n<p>Another word, “greenish,” is derived from one of the OT words for “green” and refers to disease (Lv 13:49) and fungus that forms on the walls of houses (14:37).<\/p>\n<p>“Purple” was the most highly valued dye in the ancient world. Encompassing shades varying from actual purple to red, it was obtained from mollusks of the Gastropoda class. The first people to use the dye were perhaps the ancient Phoenicians, whose name may come from a Greek word meaning “bloodred.” At any rate, the Phoenicians monopolized the purple industry for many years. Some fabrics were described as being purple: those used in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1), in the garments of the priests (28:5-8, 15, 33), in Solomon’s temple (2 Chr 2:7), in the upholstery of Solomon’s chariot (Sg 3:10), and in decorations of the Persian court (Est 1:6). Purple was customarily worn by wealthy people and royalty (Jgs 8:26; Prv 31:22; Dn 5:7). Mordecai was rewarded with a garment of purple (Est 8:15). Daniel was given a similar garment (Dn 5:29). It was worn by Assyrian soldiers (Ez 23:6). Jeremiah described idols that were robed in blue and purple garments (Jer 10:9). Ships of Tyre had awnings of blue and purple (Ez 27:7), and purple dye was an item of trade between Tyre and the people of Aram (v 16). It is used once to describe the color of hair (Sg 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>References to purple in the NT are fewer than in the OT but affirm the continued economic importance of the dye. Purple clothing denoted wealth (Lk 16:19). Jesus was robed in purple by Roman soldiers (Mk 15:17, 20; Jn 19:2, 5; cf. Mt 27:28, “scarlet”). The purple and scarlet garment of the harlot Babylon symbolized royal rank (Rv 17:4). Lydia of Thyatira was a seller of purple fabrics (Acts 16:14).<\/p>\n<p>“Red” frequently refers to the natural color of certain objects mentioned in the Bible: skin (Gn 25:25), pottage (v 30), the eye (49:12, though the word used here may mean “sparkling” or “dark”), a sacrificial heifer (Nm 19:2), water (2 Kgs 3:22), the face of a weeping person (Jb 16:16), wine (Prv 23:31), the eyes of one drinking wine (v 29), clothing (Is 63:2), a shield (Na 2:3), and horses (Zec 1:8; 6:2). It is used figuratively to describe sin (Is 1:18). A leprous disease (Lv 13:49), a spot on the skin (vv 19, 24, 42-43), and fungus on the wall of a house (14:37) were discolored with a reddish hue. The Red Sea is mentioned frequently in the OT (Ex 10:19; 15:4), but the Hebrew words thus translated actually mean “Sea of Reeds.” However, in the NT the Greek word is actually the word “red” (Acts 7:36; Heb 11:29). In the NT, red is used to describe the color of the sky (Mt 16:2-3), a horse (Rv 6:4), and a dragon (12:3).<\/p>\n<p>“Scarlet,” a brilliant red hue derived from certain insects, was used for fabrics and yarns and was highly valued in the ancient world (Rv 18:12). It is difficult to distinguish between “scarlet” and “crimson” in the Bible. A scarlet thread was bound to the hand of Zerah at birth (Gn 38:28, 30). The word describes certain fabrics in the tabernacle (Ex 25:4; 26:1, 31, 36; 27:16), the priests’ garments (28:5-8, 15, 33), rope (Jos 2:18, 21), clothing (2 Sm 1:24; Prv 31:21; Jer 4:30), lips (Sg 4:3), and soldiers’ uniforms (Na 2:3). Some kind of scarlet material was used during the ratification of the covenant at Sinai (Heb 9:19), for the cleansing of a leper (Lv 14:4-6) and of a house (vv 49-52), for covering the articles on the table of the bread of the Presence (Nm 4:8), and for the ritual of the red heifer (19:6). Matthew described Jesus’ robe at his trial as scarlet (Mt 27:28). The woman of Revelation 17:3-4 was dressed in purple and scarlet and seated upon a scarlet beast. The luxury associated with Rome is suggested by the description of clothing of purple and scarlet (Rv 18:16). Scarlet, like crimson and red, is also used figuratively of sins (Is 1:18).<\/p>\n<p> “White” translates a number of words found in the Bible. It is generally the color of natural objects such as goats (Gn 30:35), hair (Lv 13:10; Mt 5:36; Rv 1:14), diseased skin (Ex 4:6; Lv 13:4, 17), manna (Ex 16:31), snow (2 Kgs 5:27), milk and teeth (Gn 49:12), horses (Zec 1:8; 6:3; Rv 6:2; 19:11), a donkey (Jgs 5:10, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “tawny”), wool (Ez 27:18), special stones (Rv 2:17), light (Mt 17:2), clouds (Rv 14:14), and fields ready for harvest (Jn 4:35). It is used to describe the color of curtains (Est 1:6), clothing (Est 8:15; Eccl 9:8; Dn 7:9; Mk 16:5; Rv 3:5, 18; 4:4), the garments of angels (Jn 20:12; Acts 1:10), and a throne (Rv 20:11). It is used figuratively to describe cleansing from sin (Ps 51:7; Is 1:18; Dn 12:10) and the appearance of princes (Lam 4:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cloth and Cloth Manufacturing; Dye, Dyeing, Dyer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","summary_en":"COLOR The OT and NT have no exact word for “color,” although the word appears several times in our English Bibles. The words translated “color” have quite different meanings in the original languages. The word most frequently translated “colour” in the kjv literally means “eye” and suggests “appearance” (Lv 13:55; Nm 11:7; Prv 23:31; Ez 1:4, 7, 16, 22, 27; 8:2; 10:9; Dn 10:6). Only Leviticus 13:55 retains the translation “color” in the rsv. Other words translated as “color” in the rsv refer t...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":15790,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Heaven","title_en":"Heaven","content_ro":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HEAVEN<\/h3>\n<p>Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on foundations and pillars (2 Sm 22:8) and spread out above the earth, with rain descending through its doors (Ps 78:23). The keynote of the OT revelation about the physical heavens is set forth in Psalms 8 and 19:1-6. Elsewhere the OT speaks of the atmospheric heavens as the region of the clouds (Ps 147:8), winds (Zec 2:6), rain (Dt 11:11), thunder (1 Sm 2:10), dew (Dt 33:13), frost (Jb 38:29), and the abode of birds (Gn 1:26, 30). It is also the locale of such destructive forces as hail (Jos 10:11), fire, and brimstone (Gn 19:24). In the NT this notion of the vaulted expanse of the sky as the region in which the elements, clouds, and tempests gather (Mt 16:2; Lk 4:25) and birds fly (Lk 9:58) is continued.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the atmospheric regions, the Hebrew idea of the physical heavens includes stellar space, which ultimately embraces the universe. The heavenly bodies of the stellar heavens were viewed by the Hebrews as inexpressibly glorious manifestations of God’s handiwork without having any power or vitality of their own. These include the sun, moon, planets, and stars, which were but lights in the firmament of the heavens (Gn 1:14; 15:5). As such, they were regarded as unworthy of worship because God had, by his own will and grace, made humans superior to them. In fact, the Hebrews were expressly forbidden to worship the stellar bodies (Ex 20:4), the gods and goddesses who represented them (Jer 44:17-25), or to participate in astrological speculation (Is 47:13). Hence, this unique theological ordinance differentiated the Hebrews, who viewed the heavenly bodies as made and moved by the will of God, from the superstitious heathen, who worshiped them.<\/p>\n<p>The term “heaven of heavens” (Dt 10:14; see also <span>kjv<\/span> 1 Kgs 8:27; Pss 68:33; 148:4) is the literal English rendition of the Hebrew idiom for the superlative “the highest heaven.” Some have thought this the counterpart to Paul’s expression “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2), which parallels the classical Greek conception of three heavens. This notion was subsequently adopted by the Roman Catholic medieval church and in the Latin form of <em>Coelum Aqueum, Coelum Sidereum,<\/em> and <em>Coelum Empyreum.<\/em> The basic concept followed the Greek view, and it coincides with the OT view of the physical and spiritual heavens as indicated earlier. Those who follow this approach tend to regard this third heaven as the place reached by the souls of the blessed as they pass through the two lower regions of the atmosphere and outer space containing the celestial bodies, and enter into the uttermost reaches of the universe.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The Lord Jesus indicated that heaven is the dwelling place of God (Mt 6:9). Jesus, during his earthly ministry, repeatedly claimed that he had come from heaven (Jn 3:13; 6:33-51); and on at least three occasions utterances from heaven confirmed these claims (Mt 3:16-17; 17:5; Jn 12:28). There is where the true tabernacle stands, of which the earthly tabernacle was merely a shadow (cf. Heb 8:1-5). That abode of God was in view when the apostle Paul wrote of “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:2). As such, it is often seen as a synonym for God himself (cf. Mt 23:22; Lk 15:18).<\/p>\n<p>After Jesus’ ascension, recorded in Acts 1:6-11, two angels reminded the disciples that Jesus would return again from heaven. This was later confirmed by the apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:1-11; Eph 4:7-16; 1 Tm 3:16) and reiterated in the summary of the teachings of the NT known as the Apostles’ Creed. In all, the relationship of Jesus Christ to the heavenly abode of God is inextricably interwoven in the NT and is inseparable from the gospel message itself. Indeed, it is from the “right hand of God” that Christ forever lives to make intercession for those who have come to him by faith (Heb 7:25; cf. Mk 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>Paul asserts that the believer’s body will be made conformable to the glorious body of Jesus Christ when Christ returns from heaven (Phil 3:20-21). The believers need such a heavenly body to match their heavenly citizenship. The term “citizenship” (<span>kjv<\/span>) or “commonwealth” (<span>rsv<\/span>) implies a colony of individuals who live in a foreign country while observing the laws of their homeland instead of the land in which they reside (cf. Acts 22:28). The implication for believers is quite clear: They are to live according to the moral and ethical principles of God as revealed from heaven regardless of the standards proclaimed by the world. They have been raised together with Christ and have been instructed to “seek the things that are above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). From there Christ has blessed his followers “with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3). The expression “in the heavenly places” is peculiar to Ephesians (see 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12), suggesting that the blessings of the spiritual world are not relegated to some remote future time or place but can be perceived by faith here and now. That is why believers are said to have been made partakers already in the heavenly calling (Heb 3:1; 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>In the meanwhile, believers look forward to a new heaven and a new earth with the new Jerusalem. There will be no tears, sorrow, pain, death, and night there because the Son of God will be there (Rv 21:1-4, 27; 22:1-5), and in the resurrected state there will be no marrying or giving in marriage (Lk 20:27-38). At least two OT saints, Enoch (Gn 5:22-24; Heb 11:5) and Elijah (2 Kgs 2:11), were translated directly into the presence of God—into heaven. In addition to Paul’s statement about the third heaven, John was called into heaven (Rv 4:1), a heaven that is intended to be populated (cf. 19:1). All believers will ultimately dwell in heaven in their resurrection bodies, which they will receive when the Lord comes for them from heaven (1 Thes 4:16-17; Rv 19:1-4). The Lord will also give treasures and rewards at that time (Mt 5:12; 1 Cor 9:25; 2 Cor 5:1; 2 Tm 4:8; Jas 1:12; 1 Pt 1:4; 5:4; Rv 2:10; 4:10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; New Heavens and New Earth; Paradise.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","summary_en":"HEAVEN Realm (or realms) designated by a Hebrew term used to represent the sky and air and also heaven. The form of the word in Hebrew is dual (implying two of something). Although this dual form may only represent an ancient device for expressing the plural, it is supposed by some to imply the existence of a lower and an upper heaven—a physical and a spiritual heaven. In the Old Testament The OT writers viewed the physical heavens as a “firmament” appearing as a great arch supported on found...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54809,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","summary_en":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82435,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","summary_en":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110061,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","summary_en":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137687,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:2","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:2-3<\/strong> Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the <em>weather<\/em> in <em>the sky<\/em> (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">ouranos<\/span>, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","summary_en":"16:2-3 Jesus made a deliberate play on their words when they sought a “sign from heaven” (16:1). They were able to read the weather in the sky (Greek ouranos, the same word translated “heaven”), but they failed to discern the Messiah despite the many signs already given (see 11:1-6).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":54810,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","summary_en":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82436,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","summary_en":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110062,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","summary_en":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137688,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:3<\/strong> The <em>signs of the times<\/em> were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","summary_en":"16:3 The signs of the times were Jesus himself (16:4) and the various miracles that he performed (cp. 11:2-6; 12:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":700,"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}],"6":[{"id":16296,"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":22889,"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":33497,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sadducees","title_en":"Sadducees","content_ro":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SADDUCEES<\/h3>\n<p>Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheirHistory\">Their History<\/p>\n<p>A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">saddik<\/span>). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from <em>i<\/em> to <em>u<\/em> in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Saddouk<\/span> in Greek), a priest in the days of David (2 Sm 8:17; 15:24-29) who anointed Solomon (1 Kgs 1:32-39) and in his reign became chief priest (2:35). He is said to have descended from Eleazar, the son of Aaron (1 Chr 6:3-8), and Zadokite priests seem to have been responsible for priestly duties in the temple until the exile. In the blueprints for the restoration of the worship of the temple (Ez 40–48), it is the Zadokite priesthood that is again given charge to minister as “Levitical priests” (44:15-16; 48:11-12). After the exile, we read of Joshua (Jeshua) the son of Jehozadak as high priest (Hg 1:1), and his lineage was traced back to Zadok (1 Chr 6:8-15). The significance of the Zadokite priesthood continues to be stressed in writings of the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, but it is by no means clear that the Sadducees made a stand for the Zadokite priesthood. It may be added that the double <em>d<\/em> in the word is not readily explained by this view of Sadducean origins.<\/p>\n<p>Third, a late rabbinic tradition is that the Sadducees took their name from another Zadok who lived in the second century <span>BC<\/span>. There is little to commend this view.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the British NT scholar T. W. Manson suggested that their name is to be connected with the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sundikoi<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “members of the council,” thus designating the Sadducees as councillors under the Hasmonean rulers.<\/p>\n<p>The first historical knowledge of the Sadducees is in the time of Jonathan Maccabeus, who led the Jewish struggle against the Seleucids from 160 to 143 <span>BC<\/span>. Josephus (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9) said that they were a party at this time, and that when John Hyrcanus was head of the Jewish state (135–104 <span>BC<\/span>) there was strife between the Pharisees and the Sadducees (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.10.6). It is possible that the Sadducees stood in some sense for the Zadokite priesthood or for the claim that the Jerusalem priesthood of their day was Zadokite in origin, but this is far from clear. Josephus says that the Sadducees had the rich on their side, while the Pharisees had a following among the common people. In the days of Salome Alexandra (76–67 <span>BC<\/span>), the Pharisees were in the ascendancy, but when Judea became a Roman province and Roman governors began to put one high priest down and raise another up, it appears that most of the high priests were from high-born Sadducean families. While they could temporize with the Romans, these Sadducean families had power and influence in the land. As hostilities developed between the Jews and their Roman overlords, the influence of the Sadducees declined. After the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sadducees fade from history.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospel narrative they first appeared, together with Pharisees, at John’s baptism. He addressed them as “sons of snakes” and challenged them to show repentance in their lives (Mt 3:7-10). Later, the Sadducees came along with some Pharisees to “test” Jesus, asking him to show them a sign from heaven (16:1). Jesus told his disciples to beware of the Sadducees (vv 6, 11-12).<\/p>\n<p>A great difference begins to emerge between Pharisees and Sadducees in Matthew 22:23-33 (cf. Mk 12:18-27; Lk 20:27-38). The Sadducees, who, like others, wanted to embarrass Jesus with their questions, came with a trick question that showed their doubts concerning the resurrection of the dead. The Sadducees were described in this context as those who say there is no resurrection after death. They cited the case of a woman who had seven brothers as her husbands in succession. “Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?” they asked, implying that because of such a problem, the resurrection could not be a reality. Jesus answered by speaking of the error of their view caused by their ignorance of the Scriptures and of God’s power.<\/p>\n<p>In the early days of the church in Jerusalem, the priests and the captain of the temple police and the Sadducees became annoyed because the disciples were proclaiming the resurrection from the dead (Acts 4:1-2). The Sadducees seem to have led the opposition to the apostles and their preaching. Later the high priest and Sadducees determined to arrest the apostles and put them in the prison (5:17). The only other reference to them in the NT is in Acts 23:6-8, in the record of Paul’s trial before the Jewish Sanhedrin. On that occasion, Paul deliberately spoke about his belief in the resurrection so as to cause a division between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who did not believe in resurrection.<\/p>\n<p>Thus from these NT passages one realizes something of the basic tenets of the Sadducees, of their prominence among the high priestly families, and of the differences between Pharisees and Sadducees.<\/p>\n<p>Josephus, the Jewish historian who wrote in the closing years of the first century <span>AD<\/span>, adds to the information in the NT about this party. He said that the Sadducees, in contrast to the Pharisees and Essenes, gave no place to the overruling providence of God but emphasized that all that happens to us is the result of the good or evil that we do (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 13.5.9; <em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). Josephus, in a way comparable to the NT, spoke of the Sadducees’ rejection of “the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades” (<em>War<\/em> 2.8.14). “Souls die with the bodies” was what they said (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.4). Early Christian writers—Hippolytus, Origen, and Jerome—said that the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch and not the other OT books. It would seem, however, that they were not opposed to other OT books as a whole (though it is doubtful whether they accepted books such as Daniel, with its clear statement of the resurrection of the dead), but rather that they opposed the legal regulations introduced by the Pharisees and were saying that only the OT law should be considered mandatory. In this, as in their stand against belief in angels and in life after death, they appear to have regarded the Pharisees as innovators and themselves as conservatives.<\/p>\n<p>The other main source of knowledge about the Sadducees is the Mishnah, the collection of the teaching of the rabbis, put down in writing in the second century <span>AD<\/span>. The Sadducees opposed many of the detailed regulations that the Pharisees sought to impose on the people (<em>Parah<\/em> 3.3,7). It also indicates that they had a greater tendency to compromise with the ways of the Gentiles than other Jewish parties (<em>Niddah<\/em> 4.2).<\/p>\n<p><em>See<\/em> Essenes; Judaism; Pharisees.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","summary_en":"SADDUCEES Jewish sect cited 14 times in the NT, not referred to in the OT. Their History A number of suggestions have been made as to the origin of the name. First, it has been connected with the Hebrew word for “righteous” (saddik). This is difficult from an etymological point of view, as there would have been a change from i to u in the word. Nor is there reason to think that they made such a claim to be the “righteous ones.” Second, the name has been connected with Zadok (sometimes written...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37838,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Unleavened Bread","title_en":"Unleavened Bread","content_ro":"<h3>UNLEAVENED BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Bread made without leaven (yeast). In ancient times, bread makers used a piece of dough remaining from a former baking process, a piece that had fermented and developed a certain acid content—the yeast that caused bread to rise.<\/p>\n<p>Bread used at the Jewish Passover and most other religious observances was, by the command of God, unleavened (Ex 12:15-20; 23:15). Only under certain conditions were the people permitted to use leavened bread for spiritual purposes (Lv 7:13; 23:17). This was largely owing to the fact that leaven generally symbolized evil; fermentation implied decay and corruption.<\/p>\n<p>With the exception of Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33), the NT also speaks of leaven with a negative connotation. Jesus warned of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:6); Paul exhorted believers to guard against that tiny bit of yeast—unhealthy values—that can work through a whole batch of dough (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Food and Food Preparation; Leaven.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>UNLEAVENED BREAD<\/h3>\n<p>Bread made without leaven (yeast). In ancient times, bread makers used a piece of dough remaining from a former baking process, a piece that had fermented and developed a certain acid content—the yeast that caused bread to rise.<\/p>\n<p>Bread used at the Jewish Passover and most other religious observances was, by the command of God, unleavened (Ex 12:15-20; 23:15). Only under certain conditions were the people permitted to use leavened bread for spiritual purposes (Lv 7:13; 23:17). This was largely owing to the fact that leaven generally symbolized evil; fermentation implied decay and corruption.<\/p>\n<p>With the exception of Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom of God (Mt 13:33), the NT also speaks of leaven with a negative connotation. Jesus warned of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16:6); Paul exhorted believers to guard against that tiny bit of yeast—unhealthy values—that can work through a whole batch of dough (1 Cor 5:6-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bread; Food and Food Preparation; Leaven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"UNLEAVENED BREAD Bread made without leaven (yeast). In ancient times, bread makers used a piece of dough remaining from a former baking process, a piece that had fermented and developed a certain acid content—the yeast that caused bread to rise. Bread used at the Jewish Passover and most other religious observances was, by the command of God, unleavened (Ex 12:15-20; 23:15). Only under certain conditions were the people permitted to use leavened bread for spiritual purposes (Lv 7:13; 23:17). ...","summary_en":"UNLEAVENED BREAD Bread made without leaven (yeast). In ancient times, bread makers used a piece of dough remaining from a former baking process, a piece that had fermented and developed a certain acid content—the yeast that caused bread to rise. Bread used at the Jewish Passover and most other religious observances was, by the command of God, unleavened (Ex 12:15-20; 23:15). Only under certain conditions were the people permitted to use leavened bread for spiritual purposes (Lv 7:13; 23:17). ...","source":"Articles\/U.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":64920,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Little Faith","title_en":"Little Faith","content_ro":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","summary_en":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92546,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Little Faith","title_en":"Little Faith","content_ro":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","summary_en":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120172,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Little Faith","title_en":"Little Faith","content_ro":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","summary_en":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147798,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Little Faith","title_en":"Little Faith","content_ro":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Little Faith<\/h3>\n<p>The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “unbelief” (see Matt 13:58). As examples of “little faith,” the disciples do not understand their value or God’s providential protection Matt 6:30; they do not understand God’s protection in the midst of physical danger 8:26; 14:31; they do not understand Jesus’ saying regarding yeast 16:8; and they are not able to exorcise a demon 17:20. These are instances of failure in specific circumstances, not a case of having no faith whatsoever.<\/p>\n<p>The term <em>faith<\/em> reflects at least two ideas: <em>trust<\/em> (personal reliance upon the Lord) and <em>belief<\/em> (affirmation of truths). Matthew’s concern with “little faith” is about lack of trust by a follower of Jesus who is in a specific situation, rather than a failure to have basic belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior. Jesus wants his followers not only to believe in him, but also to trust, love, and obey him (see Matt 7:21-29; 22:34-40).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 6:30; 7:21-29; 8:26; 13:58; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20; 22:34-40; Luke 12:28; Jas 1:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","summary_en":"Little Faith The term translated “little faith” and related Greek terms are used five times in Matthew (6:30; 8:26; 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and only once elsewhere (Luke 12:28; cp. Jas 1:6-7). The term refers to a specific event rather than to ongoing and permanent failure. In Matthew, “little faith” happens either due to lack of knowledge on the part of Jesus’ disciples (Matt 16:8-11) or due to acting without faith during a particular incident. If someone always lacks faith, it is described as “...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":54811,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:9","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","summary_en":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82437,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:9","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","summary_en":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110063,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:9","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","summary_en":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137689,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:9","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:9-10<\/strong> Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","summary_en":"16:9-10 Jesus had demonstrated to his disciples that he is the true bread of life (15:32-39; John 6:35, 48), whereas the Jewish leaders, particularly in their teachings, were like yeast in permeating everything they touched with their sinfulness (see study note on Matt 16:11-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":54812,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","summary_en":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82438,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","summary_en":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110064,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","summary_en":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137690,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:11","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:11-12<\/strong> <em>Yeast<\/em> is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the <em>deceptive teaching<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","summary_en":"16:11-12 Yeast is often a symbol of sin and evil (see Exod 12:8, 15; Lev 6:16-17; Gal 5:9); here it indicates the permeating nature of the deceptive teaching.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":16297,"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}],"13":[{"id":5897,"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":16287,"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":19504,"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":20519,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jordan River","title_en":"Jordan River","content_ro":"<h3>JORDAN RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the descender.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sources\">Sources<\/p>\n<p>Originating at the northern end of the Huleh Basin, the river comprises four separate streams: Nahr Bereighith, Nahr Hasbani, Nahr el-Liddani, and Nahr Baniyas. In the northwest corner of the Huleh Valley the Bereighith emerges within the area of Merj Ayoun, flowing from a spring located on a modest knoll west of Mt Hermon. Slightly to the east is the Hasbani, a stream that descends from a spring 1,700 feet (518.2 meters) above sea level and follows a course of about 24 miles (38.6 kilometers). These two smaller streams merge less than a mile above their confluence with the el-Liddani and the Baniyas. The el-Liddani, lying between the Nahr Hasbani and the Nahr Baniyas, is located near Tel el-Qadi (the biblical city of Dan). The most powerful stream of the four; it is fed by ‘Ain Leddan, a spring that is nestled among thick underbrush and is fed by the melting snows off Mt Hermon. Flowing quickly and briefly, the el-Liddani rushes to meet the Nahr Baniyas, the last of the four streams. In the northeast corner of the Huleh Valley, at the NT site of Caesarea Philippi, the Baniyas originates from a cave approximately 1,100 feet (335 meters) above sea level and follows a steep descent to its confluence with the others. These four streams, making up the Jordan River, then flow together along a southerly course of 10 miles (16 kilometers) before entering Huleh Lake.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CourseandCharacteroftheRiver\">Course and Character of the River<\/p>\n<p>The course of the Jordan follows a north-south route through the Great Rift, descending gradually from the Huleh Lake (7 feet, or 2 meters, above sea level) to the Dead Sea (1,274 feet, or 388 meters, below sea level). From the Huleh Lake the river follows a 20-mile (32.2-kilometer) course, passing through the basaltic lip that forms the southern dam of the Huleh Basin (Rosh Pinnah Sill) and descends quickly to the Sea of Galilee (685 feet, or 209 meters, below sea level). To the south lies the Dead Sea at a distance of approximately 65 miles (105 kilometers). The river that connects these two seas, however, travels a circuitous route of 200 miles (322 kilometers), following a snakelike riverbed cut through the Ghor, the canyon floor.<\/p>\n<p>The Jordan has many tributaries, not all of which are perennial. If there is no consistent water source, such as a spring at the head of the riverbed, then these V-shaped watercourses remain dry until a seasonal deluge. When the rain comes, these dry, narrow courses are filled with fast-paced streams that flow off the sides of the canyon into the Jordan River. North of the Sea of Galilee four major systems feed the fluvial system in the Huleh Basin: Nahr Dishon and Nahr Hazor on the west, and Nahr Shuah and Nahr Gilbon on the east. Between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are the following major tributary systems: on the east—Yarmuq, ‘Arab, Tayibeh, Ziqlab, Jurm, Yabis, Kufrinjia, Rajib, Zarqa, Nimrin, Abu Gharuba; on the west—Fejjas, Bireh, Jalub, Malih, Far’ah, Aujah, el-Qelt.<\/p>\n<p>The character of the Ghor varies from north to south as the canyon floor drops farther below sea level. Just south of the Sea of Galilee arable fields may be cultivated without irrigation, which permits occupation and settlement. South of this and farther below sea level, beyond the narrowest constriction of the canyon at Ghor el-Wahadina, the terrain and climate change. Since the floor now consistently approaches 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level, the climatic conditions approximate that of the desert. In this dry and desolate region, the river and its immediate environs now assume a more prominent role, becoming a lifeline to the flora and the fauna that hug its banks. Its course and character are more easily discerned as it has become a veritable stream in the desert. The dense foliage on the banks of the Jordan is still today a wildlife haunt as it was in antiquity, the low-lying shrubs and the tamarisk alike providing thick ground cover. This lower section of the canyon, called the Zor, is 150 feet (45.7 meters) below the Ghor and separated by the <em>qattara<\/em> (a sedimentary deposit of grayish-white marls and clays that form precipitous and barren slopes) from the canyon floor above. Generally inaccessible and extremely dangerous, the Zor and <em>qattara<\/em> form a natural barrier between Cis-Jordan (west) and Transjordan (east). Thus, trade, settlement, and travel were necessarily affected by the various topographical features that characterize this area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalEvents\">Biblical Events<\/p>\n<p>The OT Israelites passed across the Jordan upon entry into the Promised Land (Jos 3:14-17). The fords of the Jordan were the sites of conflict in the war of Jephthah and the Gileadites against the Ephraimites (Jgs 12:1-6). The prophet Elijah sought refuge from Ahab king of Israel by the brook of Kerith east of the Jordan (1 Kgs 17:1-5). Elijah was translated up to heaven in a whirlwind after having crossed the Jordan with Elisha on dry ground (2 Kgs 2:6-12). Naaman, the Syrian general, bathed in the Jordan at the command of Elisha and his leprosy was healed (5:8-14). Elisha made the ax head float here (2 Kgs 6:1-7). In the NT, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan (Mt 3:13-17). Peter confessed that Jesus was the “Christ, the Son of the living God” at Caesarea Philippi—located on one of the sources of the Jordan, Nahr Baniyas (16:13-20). Jesus healed two blind men at Jericho, which is near the Jordan (20:29-34) and visited with Zacchaeus in that same city (Lk 19:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JORDAN RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the descender.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sources\">Sources<\/p>\n<p>Originating at the northern end of the Huleh Basin, the river comprises four separate streams: Nahr Bereighith, Nahr Hasbani, Nahr el-Liddani, and Nahr Baniyas. In the northwest corner of the Huleh Valley the Bereighith emerges within the area of Merj Ayoun, flowing from a spring located on a modest knoll west of Mt Hermon. Slightly to the east is the Hasbani, a stream that descends from a spring 1,700 feet (518.2 meters) above sea level and follows a course of about 24 miles (38.6 kilometers). These two smaller streams merge less than a mile above their confluence with the el-Liddani and the Baniyas. The el-Liddani, lying between the Nahr Hasbani and the Nahr Baniyas, is located near Tel el-Qadi (the biblical city of Dan). The most powerful stream of the four; it is fed by ‘Ain Leddan, a spring that is nestled among thick underbrush and is fed by the melting snows off Mt Hermon. Flowing quickly and briefly, the el-Liddani rushes to meet the Nahr Baniyas, the last of the four streams. In the northeast corner of the Huleh Valley, at the NT site of Caesarea Philippi, the Baniyas originates from a cave approximately 1,100 feet (335 meters) above sea level and follows a steep descent to its confluence with the others. These four streams, making up the Jordan River, then flow together along a southerly course of 10 miles (16 kilometers) before entering Huleh Lake.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CourseandCharacteroftheRiver\">Course and Character of the River<\/p>\n<p>The course of the Jordan follows a north-south route through the Great Rift, descending gradually from the Huleh Lake (7 feet, or 2 meters, above sea level) to the Dead Sea (1,274 feet, or 388 meters, below sea level). From the Huleh Lake the river follows a 20-mile (32.2-kilometer) course, passing through the basaltic lip that forms the southern dam of the Huleh Basin (Rosh Pinnah Sill) and descends quickly to the Sea of Galilee (685 feet, or 209 meters, below sea level). To the south lies the Dead Sea at a distance of approximately 65 miles (105 kilometers). The river that connects these two seas, however, travels a circuitous route of 200 miles (322 kilometers), following a snakelike riverbed cut through the Ghor, the canyon floor.<\/p>\n<p>The Jordan has many tributaries, not all of which are perennial. If there is no consistent water source, such as a spring at the head of the riverbed, then these V-shaped watercourses remain dry until a seasonal deluge. When the rain comes, these dry, narrow courses are filled with fast-paced streams that flow off the sides of the canyon into the Jordan River. North of the Sea of Galilee four major systems feed the fluvial system in the Huleh Basin: Nahr Dishon and Nahr Hazor on the west, and Nahr Shuah and Nahr Gilbon on the east. Between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are the following major tributary systems: on the east—Yarmuq, ‘Arab, Tayibeh, Ziqlab, Jurm, Yabis, Kufrinjia, Rajib, Zarqa, Nimrin, Abu Gharuba; on the west—Fejjas, Bireh, Jalub, Malih, Far’ah, Aujah, el-Qelt.<\/p>\n<p>The character of the Ghor varies from north to south as the canyon floor drops farther below sea level. Just south of the Sea of Galilee arable fields may be cultivated without irrigation, which permits occupation and settlement. South of this and farther below sea level, beyond the narrowest constriction of the canyon at Ghor el-Wahadina, the terrain and climate change. Since the floor now consistently approaches 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level, the climatic conditions approximate that of the desert. In this dry and desolate region, the river and its immediate environs now assume a more prominent role, becoming a lifeline to the flora and the fauna that hug its banks. Its course and character are more easily discerned as it has become a veritable stream in the desert. The dense foliage on the banks of the Jordan is still today a wildlife haunt as it was in antiquity, the low-lying shrubs and the tamarisk alike providing thick ground cover. This lower section of the canyon, called the Zor, is 150 feet (45.7 meters) below the Ghor and separated by the <em>qattara<\/em> (a sedimentary deposit of grayish-white marls and clays that form precipitous and barren slopes) from the canyon floor above. Generally inaccessible and extremely dangerous, the Zor and <em>qattara<\/em> form a natural barrier between Cis-Jordan (west) and Transjordan (east). Thus, trade, settlement, and travel were necessarily affected by the various topographical features that characterize this area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalEvents\">Biblical Events<\/p>\n<p>The OT Israelites passed across the Jordan upon entry into the Promised Land (Jos 3:14-17). The fords of the Jordan were the sites of conflict in the war of Jephthah and the Gileadites against the Ephraimites (Jgs 12:1-6). The prophet Elijah sought refuge from Ahab king of Israel by the brook of Kerith east of the Jordan (1 Kgs 17:1-5). Elijah was translated up to heaven in a whirlwind after having crossed the Jordan with Elisha on dry ground (2 Kgs 2:6-12). Naaman, the Syrian general, bathed in the Jordan at the command of Elisha and his leprosy was healed (5:8-14). Elisha made the ax head float here (2 Kgs 6:1-7). In the NT, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan (Mt 3:13-17). Peter confessed that Jesus was the “Christ, the Son of the living God” at Caesarea Philippi—located on one of the sources of the Jordan, Nahr Baniyas (16:13-20). Jesus healed two blind men at Jericho, which is near the Jordan (20:29-34) and visited with Zacchaeus in that same city (Lk 19:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JORDAN RIVER River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the d...","summary_en":"JORDAN RIVER River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the d...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24785,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35841,"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":54813,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:13","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","summary_en":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82439,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:13","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","summary_en":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110065,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:13","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","summary_en":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137691,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:13","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:13","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:13<\/strong> <em>Caesarea Philippi<\/em><em>,<\/em> located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","summary_en":"16:13 Caesarea Philippi, located approximately twenty-five miles north of Capernaum, hosted many shrines to the Roman god of nature, Pan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64981,"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":65101,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65148,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65696,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Suffering Prophet","title_en":"The Suffering Prophet","content_ro":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","summary_en":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92607,"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":92727,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92774,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93322,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Suffering Prophet","title_en":"The Suffering Prophet","content_ro":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","summary_en":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120233,"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":120353,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120400,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120948,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Suffering Prophet","title_en":"The Suffering Prophet","content_ro":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","summary_en":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147859,"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":147979,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148026,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148574,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Suffering Prophet","title_en":"The Suffering Prophet","content_ro":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Suffering Prophet<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15.<\/p>\n<p>As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were identifying him as a prophet (Matt 16:13-14). And the disciples on the Emmaus road identified him as “a prophet who did powerful miracles” and “a mighty teacher” (Luke 24:19).<\/p>\n<p>Like other prophets, Jesus suffered for his testimony (cp. 1 Kgs 19:1-18; Jer 11:18-19; 18:18; 20:1-2, 7-18; 26:7-11, 20-23; 38:1-6). While the people linked Jesus’ prophetic office to his miracles and teaching, Jesus connected it especially to his suffering. At Nazareth, he affirmed that “no prophet is accepted in his own hometown” (Luke 4:24), and he later accused Israel’s leaders of murdering their prophets (11:47-51). As he journeyed to Jerusalem, he exclaimed, “It wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!” (13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, when Israel did not heed God’s prophets, divine judgment followed. Similarly, God’s people would face judgment if they did not listen to Jesus (see Acts 3:22-23).<\/p>\n<p>Just as the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah confirms that he is the Savior for all people, so his role as prophet confirms that his message comes from God, and his words are the authentic word of God, which must be heard and obeyed.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 18:15; Matt 5:12; 23:34-37; Luke 4:22-24; 6:23, 26; 7:16; 11:47-52; 13:33-34; 24:17-21; Acts 3:22-23; 7:37, 52<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","summary_en":"The Suffering Prophet Jesus is described by many titles in the Gospels, including Messiah, Son of David, Son of Man, Son of God, and Lord. In Luke, a key title is “Prophet.” Jesus was the prophet that Moses predicted in Deut 18:15. As a prophet, Jesus preached God’s word and performed miracles like those of the great Old Testament prophets. When Jesus raised a widow’s son, the people cried out, “A mighty prophet has risen among us” (Luke 7:16). The disiples reported to Jesus that people were ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":41574,"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":41920,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42418,"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":69200,"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":69546,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70044,"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":96826,"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":97172,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97670,"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":124452,"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":124798,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Jeremiah","title_en":"Jeremiah","content_ro":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jeremiah<\/h3>\n<p>Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 <span>BC<\/span>). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he would tell him what to say and would guide and protect him despite opposition (Jer 1:7-8, 18-19).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah warned the kings and people of Judah to repent in order to avoid exile. They had broken God’s covenant, primarily through idolatry (Jer 10:1-16), and as a result, they were subject to the consequences (Deut 27–28). They rejected God’s invitation to repent, so Jeremiah later delivered messages that God’s judgment had become inevitable.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah was particularly hated by Judah’s leaders. King Jehoiakim held Jeremiah in contempt and tried to silence him. King Zedekiah secretly sought Jeremiah’s advice, but bowed to his administrators when they wanted to silence the prophet. God’s word could not be silenced, however. The promised judgment came in 586 <span>BC<\/span>: Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple was destroyed, and Judah’s leaders were killed or exiled to Babylon.<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, knew of Jeremiah and was favorably disposed toward him (Jer 39:11-12). As a result, the captain of the Babylonian army allowed Jeremiah to stay with the remnant in Judah. Jeremiah counseled those who remained behind to submit to Babylon, even when Judean terrorists killed Gedaliah, the governor appointed by Babylon. The Judeans rejected Jeremiah’s advice and fled to Egypt. Jeremiah was taken with them, and little more is ever heard about Jeremiah. According to tradition, he was stoned to death by Jewish exiles in Tahpanhes, Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah suffered continual rejection, imprisonment, and physical abuse during his life, but his ministry was not entirely negative. He foretold that the Exile would be temporary (25:1-14) and that God would establish a new covenant with his people (31:31-34). This promise was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Luke 22:20).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Chr 35:25; 36:12, 21; Jer 1:1-10; Jer 13:1-14; 18:1-12; 19:1–20:6; 24:1-10; 26:1–29:32; 32:1-15; 36:1–44:30; Dan 9:2; Matt 16:14; 27:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","summary_en":"Jeremiah Jeremiah, a prophet in Jerusalem before its destruction in 586 BC, is sometimes called the “weeping prophet” because he shared his personal struggles and sorrows as he delivered God’s messages. Jeremiah was born in Anathoth, near Jerusalem, during Manasseh’s reign. His father was Hilkiah of Benjamin. Jeremiah received his calling as a prophet during the thirteenth year of Josiah’s reign (627 BC). At first, Jeremiah retreated from his call (Jer 1:6), but God assured Jeremiah that he w...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125296,"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":18925,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jeremiah (Person)","title_en":"Jeremiah (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JEREMIAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 <span>BC<\/span>; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the <span>kjv<\/span>.<\/li>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Jeremiah 30:6 and 31:8 and cannot be limited to preadolescence. He was probably referring to his inexperience rather than to his age. Jeremiah was born about 657 <span>BC<\/span> during the reign of the wicked king Manasseh, while the great Ashurbanipal, who had shaken the world by sacking the ancient Egyptian city of Thebes in 663 <span>BC<\/span>, ruled a world empire from Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>God informed Jeremiah that he had consecrated and appointed him before birth (Jer 1:4-5). Jeremiah first shrank with a sense of inadequacy and fear: “O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>, . . . I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!” (v 6, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would not allow Jeremiah to excuse himself. He was assured that words would be given him to speak, and guidance given for the way (v 7). He was promised protection (v 18) and deliverance (v 8) despite opposition (v 19). God touched his mouth, signifying divine inspiration of his words, and gave the sign of a branch from an almond tree, explaining that the Lord is watching (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg). The third sign was the boiling pot (v 13) facing from the north, picturing the source and fury of impending disaster.<\/p>\n<p>Thus the tone of Jeremiah’s life ministry was set: judgment, disaster, danger, defeat, and impending death for the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Early Ministry<\/p>\n<p>The messages given by Jeremiah during his first five years of ministry may have been instrumental in the great revival of 622 <span>BC<\/span>. Those cooperating with King Josiah in the reformation and friendly with Jeremiah included Ahikam and his father, Shaphan (Jer 26:24); Gedaliah, Ahikam’s son (39:14), who later became governor; Acbor, son of Micaiah, also called Abdon, whose son Elnathan joined the opposition (26:22) but later repented (36:25); and Asaiah (2 Chr 34:20). The prophets Nahum and Zephaniah also influenced the reform movement, which must have climaxed under the preaching of Habakkuk and Jeremiah, the priestly ministry of Hilkiah, and the prophecies of Huldah the prophetess. During the reign of King Josiah, Jeremiah spoke without the fear of persecution that plagued his later ministry. Though the content of the book of Jeremiah sometimes appears to be fragmentary, most of chapters 1–19 date to the time of Josiah.<\/p>\n<p>The finding of the lost Book of the Covenant in the temple debris may be the reason for the words in Jeremiah 15:16: “Your words are what sustain me. They bring me great joy and are my heart’s delight” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The words “So be it, <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jer 11:5) in a context recalling the words of Moses in the Torah may be Jeremiah’s response after hearing King Josiah read the newly found book.<\/p>\n<p>Small towns and rural areas, including his hometown, heard Jeremiah’s denunciation of high places and idolatry. They sought to kill the young prophet, or at least to intimidate him (11:21). Instead of being silent, Jeremiah asserted that his motivation was for their good and condemned their resistance to the truth as their greatest danger.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jeremiah began his ministry, a number of world-changing events took place. Ashurbanipal died and the Assyrian Empire rapidly declined. Nabopolassar began a 21-year reign in Babylon, leading an expansion that culminated in his son Nebuchadnezzar’s subjugation of the known world. As the world news filtered in, Jeremiah turned more toward Jerusalem. His first temple speeches (chs 7–10) may have been uttered at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Nabopolassar felt his strength sufficient to launch an attack against Assyrian territory in 616 <span>BC<\/span>, but he advanced cautiously because Psamtik I (Psammetichus) of Egypt appeared ready to aid Assyria. Cyaxares of Media pounced on Assyria when Babylon hesitated and took its most sacred city, Asshur, in 614 <span>BC<\/span>. Babylon joined Media, along with Scythia, and waged an assault against Nineveh, which fell late in the summer of 612 <span>BC<\/span>. The Assyrian Empire had shriveled to two small holdings, Haran and Carchemish.<\/p>\n<p>Nabopolassar took Haran in 610, and Ashuruballit, having escaped, appealed to Egypt for help at Carchemish. Neco, who had become pharaoh within the year, responded immediately. He marched through Judah without giving Josiah prior notice and asked that the Jews not bother him in view of his haste to go northward (2 Chr 35:21). Ignoring the request, Josiah pursued them to Megiddo and was wounded in the ensuing battle; he died in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Ministry during the Reign of Jehoiakim<\/p>\n<p>In place of Jehoahaz, Josiah’s fourth son, who reigned only three months, Pharaoh Neco enthroned Jehoiakim (Eliakim). Neco demanded heavy indemnity payments from Judah and took Jehoahaz prisoner as collateral to assure payment (2 Kgs 23:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the reign of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah, moved by God’s Spirit, delivered his third temple speech (Jer 26) on the occasion of one of the annual Jewish feasts. He called for the people to repent and to act on the basis of the revelation they had heard repeatedly from the Book of the Law. The barb of the sermon came in the warning: “This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: If you will not listen to me and obey the law I have given you, and if you will not listen to my servants, the prophets—for I sent them again and again to warn you, but you would not listen to them—then I will destroy this Temple as I destroyed Shiloh, the place where the Tabernacle was located. And I will make Jerusalem an object of cursing in every nation on earth” (26:4-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Shiloh had been the heart of Jewish worship from Joshua to Samuel, but after being destroyed by the Philistines, it never revived. It served as an example of complete desolation following God’s judgment in the days of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>Crowds gathered rapidly and reacted angrily against Jeremiah. Priests and princes hurried to the New Gate, where a court was established to bring order and to control violence. Jehoiakim would be no help to Jeremiah, for he had refused to listen to God’s messages (Jer 22:21). The priests and false prophets spoke against Jeremiah, calling him a traitor. Then some of the elders spoke to the people about Uriah, who had prophesied the same message. Rather than risk disaster, Ahikam persuaded the court to spare Jeremiah.<\/p>\n<p>Egypt controlled Palestine and Syria after the decay of the Assyrian Empire. In 606 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt succeeded in annihilating a garrison city of Babylonian soldiers south of Carchemish and then reoccupied Carchemish to await the return blow from Babylon. This Egyptian victory meant persecution for Jeremiah, who was often accused of false prophecy (cf. Jer 20).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah never had confidence in Egypt. Each time a Jewish leader would call for a new alliance with Egypt, Jeremiah repeated God’s message against it. Whenever a Jewish group fled to Egypt for security, Jeremiah warned of worse things in that land of false refuge (see Jer 44:26-27). Jeremiah’s ode and prophecy in chapter 46 poetically describe Egypt’s defeat at Carchemish, when Nabopolassar sent his son Nebuchadnezzar to destroy them (605 <span>BC<\/span>). After smashing the Egyptian army at Carchemish, Nebuchadnezzar pursued the enemy through Judah. “Not a single man escaped to his own country,” reads the exaggerated Babylonian record. His father’s death, however, prevented him from invading Egypt, and he returned to Babylon to assume the throne. The following year Nebuchadnezzar, now king of Babylonia, returned to accept the homage of the rulers of Judah, Syria, and Phoenicia. On this occasion God gave Jeremiah his great 70-year prophecy (Jer 25:11-12), which became the basis of Daniel 9:2, 24-27.<\/p>\n<p>A year after the decisive battle at Carchemish, Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe, finished recording all the dictated words of Jeremiah and was reading from this scroll at the temple. A report reached the king, who sent Jehudi, a servant, to fetch the scroll and read it to him. When this was done, Jehoiakim burned the scroll in spite of his counselors, who pleaded that the king not do it (Jer 36:23-25). God’s message, soon rewritten, added a promise of fearful judgment on Jehoiakim (vv 27-31).<\/p>\n<p>Ambitious young Nebuchadnezzar determined to add Egypt to his dominion. In 601 <span>BC<\/span> he led his forces through Judah again, but Neco had advance warning and was prepared for the onslaught. In the desert of Shur, Nebuchadnezzar suffered defeat. Encouraged by this display of Egyptian defensive strength, the pro-Egyptian parties in Judah asserted themselves, persuading Jehoiakim to lead them to freedom from Babylon by making an alliance with Egypt (2 Kgs 24:1). But help from Egypt did not come (v 7).<\/p>\n<p>In 599 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar armed those surrounding the rebel Jewish kingdom to harass the Jews, which they willingly did (2 Kgs 24:2). Evidently Jehoiakim lost his life in one of these raids. Since the people despised him, his body was thrown out without honorable burial, as Jeremiah had predicted (Jer 22:19).<\/p>\n<p>Ministry during the Reign of Zedekiah<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem in 598 <span>BC<\/span> lasted only a short time because the new king, Jehoiachin, crowned at age 18, knew resistance was useless. He gave himself up, with all his family and court, in March of 597 <span>BC<\/span>, after serving as king about three months. The Babylonian Chronicle reads: “He [Nebuchadnezzar] seized the city and captured the king.”<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiachin was carried to Babylon along with 8,000 (2 Kgs 24:16; cf. v 14) officers, artisans, and executives (Ezekiel among them) and much booty. In his place Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, to rule. Zedekiah proceeded to organize his government with the less capable and inexperienced help left after the deportation.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah took up his thankless ministry, calling on the Jews to believe God, obey the laws of Babylon, and reject false hopes in Egypt. Zedekiah turned a deaf ear to these appeals, listening rather to the unwise advice of his counselors (Jer 37:1-2). During the first year of Zedekiah’s rule, Jeremiah received the vision of the two baskets of figs. The Jews carried to Babylon were like good figs, while Zedekiah and those who trusted in Egypt were like rotten figs (24:1-8). The reason for this reproachful description was that the Jews began plotting rebellion against Babylon along with Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon from the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah (27:1-3), thus breaking their oath of loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar and repudiating God’s message through Jeremiah.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt the pharaoh began to renew plans to organize dissidents within the Babylonian Empire to revolt. He hired Jewish soldiers to aid him in protecting his southern border. The Jewish soldiers settled on a Nile island called Elephantine, or Yeb (593–410 <span>BC<\/span>). Jeremiah addressed an oracle to these Jews (ch 44). The treaty for Jews to help in Egypt evidently also assumed that Egyptians would aid Israel. When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem in 589, Pharaoh Hophra came to the aid of Zedekiah. Nebuchadnezzar, ruling from Riblah, commanded that the siege against Jerusalem be lifted in order to make a surprise attack on Hophra (37:5). The release gave Jeremiah an opportunity to journey to Anathoth to secure some family property (v 12). However, Irijah, captain of the guard, arrested Jeremiah in the Gate of Benjamin for defecting to the enemy, and he was beaten and flung into a dungeon. King Zedekiah brought him out after many days to obtain a prognostication. With characteristic boldness, Jeremiah told the king he would shortly become a captive. At the same time, Jeremiah requested relief from injustice for himself. He gained part of his request but continued as prisoner in the court of the guard.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonian army chased Pharaoh Hophra back to Egypt and returned to crush Jerusalem without further mercy. The siege, which began in 589 <span>BC<\/span>, was restored with rigor in January of 588, Zedekiah’s ninth year (39:1). During this time, the Lord gave Jeremiah foreknowledge of a visit from a cousin who wished to sell a field near Anathoth (32:7-9; cf. 37:12). Jeremiah bought the field as an object lesson to verify the message of restoration after a captivity of 70 years (29:10).<\/p>\n<p>The armies of Babylon cut off all supplies from Jerusalem and were able to destroy the last two outlying Jewish fortresses of Lachish and Azekah (34:7). Food became scarce. Disease spread. Undisposed-of sewage and impure cistern water caused pestilence. With increased distress came Jeremiah’s increased appeal for the city to surrender.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah remained in the prison court until the Babylonians breached the city wall in July of 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The king escaped by night and succeeded in reaching the plains of Jericho but was captured there and taken to Riblah. Zedekiah’s family and counselors were killed; he himself was blinded and taken in chains to Babylon, where he died soon after (39:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Back in Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general, sent most of the Jews into captivity. Jeremiah, however, was granted special consideration; after being released from prison, he was placed under the care of Gedaliah, son of Ahikam.<\/p>\n<p>After the Fall of Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>A month after the fall of Jerusalem, the city was burned and the walls broken down. Gedaliah was appointed governor of the remaining agricultural community, with headquarters at Mizpah. Jeremiah returned to Jerusalem, where, according to tradition, he took up his abode in a grotto near what is now known as Gordon’s Calvary. There he wrote the book of Lamentations.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonite king Baalis, plotting rebellion against Babylon, instigated the murder of Gedaliah (40:13). In the reaction that followed, the remaining people followed the leader Johanan ben Kareah to a camp near Bethlehem, intending to go to Egypt. They asked Jeremiah, at Jerusalem, to give guidance from the Lord, promising obedience. Jeremiah’s message required that they remain in Israel and not go to Egypt. Disobedience was complete and immediate. Fearing Babylon, they departed from Judah, taking Jeremiah with them, and entered Egypt (41:16–43:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah did not stop his ministry in Egypt. His message at Tahpanhes (43:8-12) assured a victorious conquest of the land by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place in 568–567 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Jews from all parts of Egypt gathered to discuss their future as exiles. Jeremiah took the opportunity to denounce their idolatry. Jewish women as well as men argued that they had enjoyed prosperity while serving idols but had suffered since stopping. Jeremiah condemned their obdurate blindness to reality and gave God’s indictment. For a verifying sign, Jeremiah predicted that Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt would be assassinated (44:30), which happened in 466 <span>BC<\/span>. No later record of Jeremiah’s acts exists in the Bible. Tradition says Jeremiah was stoned to death by the people of the Jewish exile settlement in Tahpanhes.<\/p>\n<p>Though Jeremiah suffered continued rejection during his life, he has been honored by numerous apocryphal and traditional embellishments to his history. Jesus could well have had Jeremiah in mind when he said, “You build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed and decorate the graves of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. . . . [You are] the descendants of those who murdered the prophets” (Mt 23:29-31, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>\n<li>2. Family head in the Transjordan portion of Manasseh whom Tiglath-pileser took captive (1 Chr 5:23-26; cf. 2 Kgs 15:29).<\/li>\n<li>3. Father of Hamutal, a wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ambidextrous Benjamite bowman and slinger who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:4).<\/li>\n<li>5, 6. Two Gadite soldiers who joined David’s army (1 Chr 12:10, 13).<\/li>\n<li>7. Postexilic priest who with Nehemiah set his seal to the covenant, renewing the people’s promise to obey God’s laws (Neh 10:2). He is mentioned again (12:34) as part of the procession for the dedication of the new wall of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>8. Priest who returned from exile with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:1) and became head of a family of priests (v 12).<\/li>\n<li>9. Father of Jaazaniah, a Recabite who refused to drink wine (Jer 35:3).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JEREMIAH (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 <span>BC<\/span>; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the <span>kjv<\/span>.<\/li>\n<p>Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 <span>BC<\/span>). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Jeremiah 30:6 and 31:8 and cannot be limited to preadolescence. He was probably referring to his inexperience rather than to his age. Jeremiah was born about 657 <span>BC<\/span> during the reign of the wicked king Manasseh, while the great Ashurbanipal, who had shaken the world by sacking the ancient Egyptian city of Thebes in 663 <span>BC<\/span>, ruled a world empire from Assyria.<\/p>\n<p>God informed Jeremiah that he had consecrated and appointed him before birth (Jer 1:4-5). Jeremiah first shrank with a sense of inadequacy and fear: “O Sovereign <span>Lord<\/span>, . . . I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!” (v 6, <span>nlt<\/span>). God would not allow Jeremiah to excuse himself. He was assured that words would be given him to speak, and guidance given for the way (v 7). He was promised protection (v 18) and deliverance (v 8) despite opposition (v 19). God touched his mouth, signifying divine inspiration of his words, and gave the sign of a branch from an almond tree, explaining that the Lord is watching (see <span>nlt<\/span> mg). The third sign was the boiling pot (v 13) facing from the north, picturing the source and fury of impending disaster.<\/p>\n<p>Thus the tone of Jeremiah’s life ministry was set: judgment, disaster, danger, defeat, and impending death for the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Early Ministry<\/p>\n<p>The messages given by Jeremiah during his first five years of ministry may have been instrumental in the great revival of 622 <span>BC<\/span>. Those cooperating with King Josiah in the reformation and friendly with Jeremiah included Ahikam and his father, Shaphan (Jer 26:24); Gedaliah, Ahikam’s son (39:14), who later became governor; Acbor, son of Micaiah, also called Abdon, whose son Elnathan joined the opposition (26:22) but later repented (36:25); and Asaiah (2 Chr 34:20). The prophets Nahum and Zephaniah also influenced the reform movement, which must have climaxed under the preaching of Habakkuk and Jeremiah, the priestly ministry of Hilkiah, and the prophecies of Huldah the prophetess. During the reign of King Josiah, Jeremiah spoke without the fear of persecution that plagued his later ministry. Though the content of the book of Jeremiah sometimes appears to be fragmentary, most of chapters 1–19 date to the time of Josiah.<\/p>\n<p>The finding of the lost Book of the Covenant in the temple debris may be the reason for the words in Jeremiah 15:16: “Your words are what sustain me. They bring me great joy and are my heart’s delight” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The words “So be it, <span>Lord<\/span>” (Jer 11:5) in a context recalling the words of Moses in the Torah may be Jeremiah’s response after hearing King Josiah read the newly found book.<\/p>\n<p>Small towns and rural areas, including his hometown, heard Jeremiah’s denunciation of high places and idolatry. They sought to kill the young prophet, or at least to intimidate him (11:21). Instead of being silent, Jeremiah asserted that his motivation was for their good and condemned their resistance to the truth as their greatest danger.<\/p>\n<p>Shortly after Jeremiah began his ministry, a number of world-changing events took place. Ashurbanipal died and the Assyrian Empire rapidly declined. Nabopolassar began a 21-year reign in Babylon, leading an expansion that culminated in his son Nebuchadnezzar’s subjugation of the known world. As the world news filtered in, Jeremiah turned more toward Jerusalem. His first temple speeches (chs 7–10) may have been uttered at this time.<\/p>\n<p>Nabopolassar felt his strength sufficient to launch an attack against Assyrian territory in 616 <span>BC<\/span>, but he advanced cautiously because Psamtik I (Psammetichus) of Egypt appeared ready to aid Assyria. Cyaxares of Media pounced on Assyria when Babylon hesitated and took its most sacred city, Asshur, in 614 <span>BC<\/span>. Babylon joined Media, along with Scythia, and waged an assault against Nineveh, which fell late in the summer of 612 <span>BC<\/span>. The Assyrian Empire had shriveled to two small holdings, Haran and Carchemish.<\/p>\n<p>Nabopolassar took Haran in 610, and Ashuruballit, having escaped, appealed to Egypt for help at Carchemish. Neco, who had become pharaoh within the year, responded immediately. He marched through Judah without giving Josiah prior notice and asked that the Jews not bother him in view of his haste to go northward (2 Chr 35:21). Ignoring the request, Josiah pursued them to Megiddo and was wounded in the ensuing battle; he died in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>Ministry during the Reign of Jehoiakim<\/p>\n<p>In place of Jehoahaz, Josiah’s fourth son, who reigned only three months, Pharaoh Neco enthroned Jehoiakim (Eliakim). Neco demanded heavy indemnity payments from Judah and took Jehoahaz prisoner as collateral to assure payment (2 Kgs 23:31-33).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the reign of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah, moved by God’s Spirit, delivered his third temple speech (Jer 26) on the occasion of one of the annual Jewish feasts. He called for the people to repent and to act on the basis of the revelation they had heard repeatedly from the Book of the Law. The barb of the sermon came in the warning: “This is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: If you will not listen to me and obey the law I have given you, and if you will not listen to my servants, the prophets—for I sent them again and again to warn you, but you would not listen to them—then I will destroy this Temple as I destroyed Shiloh, the place where the Tabernacle was located. And I will make Jerusalem an object of cursing in every nation on earth” (26:4-6, <span>nlt<\/span>). Shiloh had been the heart of Jewish worship from Joshua to Samuel, but after being destroyed by the Philistines, it never revived. It served as an example of complete desolation following God’s judgment in the days of Eli.<\/p>\n<p>Crowds gathered rapidly and reacted angrily against Jeremiah. Priests and princes hurried to the New Gate, where a court was established to bring order and to control violence. Jehoiakim would be no help to Jeremiah, for he had refused to listen to God’s messages (Jer 22:21). The priests and false prophets spoke against Jeremiah, calling him a traitor. Then some of the elders spoke to the people about Uriah, who had prophesied the same message. Rather than risk disaster, Ahikam persuaded the court to spare Jeremiah.<\/p>\n<p>Egypt controlled Palestine and Syria after the decay of the Assyrian Empire. In 606 <span>BC<\/span> Egypt succeeded in annihilating a garrison city of Babylonian soldiers south of Carchemish and then reoccupied Carchemish to await the return blow from Babylon. This Egyptian victory meant persecution for Jeremiah, who was often accused of false prophecy (cf. Jer 20).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah never had confidence in Egypt. Each time a Jewish leader would call for a new alliance with Egypt, Jeremiah repeated God’s message against it. Whenever a Jewish group fled to Egypt for security, Jeremiah warned of worse things in that land of false refuge (see Jer 44:26-27). Jeremiah’s ode and prophecy in chapter 46 poetically describe Egypt’s defeat at Carchemish, when Nabopolassar sent his son Nebuchadnezzar to destroy them (605 <span>BC<\/span>). After smashing the Egyptian army at Carchemish, Nebuchadnezzar pursued the enemy through Judah. “Not a single man escaped to his own country,” reads the exaggerated Babylonian record. His father’s death, however, prevented him from invading Egypt, and he returned to Babylon to assume the throne. The following year Nebuchadnezzar, now king of Babylonia, returned to accept the homage of the rulers of Judah, Syria, and Phoenicia. On this occasion God gave Jeremiah his great 70-year prophecy (Jer 25:11-12), which became the basis of Daniel 9:2, 24-27.<\/p>\n<p>A year after the decisive battle at Carchemish, Baruch, Jeremiah’s scribe, finished recording all the dictated words of Jeremiah and was reading from this scroll at the temple. A report reached the king, who sent Jehudi, a servant, to fetch the scroll and read it to him. When this was done, Jehoiakim burned the scroll in spite of his counselors, who pleaded that the king not do it (Jer 36:23-25). God’s message, soon rewritten, added a promise of fearful judgment on Jehoiakim (vv 27-31).<\/p>\n<p>Ambitious young Nebuchadnezzar determined to add Egypt to his dominion. In 601 <span>BC<\/span> he led his forces through Judah again, but Neco had advance warning and was prepared for the onslaught. In the desert of Shur, Nebuchadnezzar suffered defeat. Encouraged by this display of Egyptian defensive strength, the pro-Egyptian parties in Judah asserted themselves, persuading Jehoiakim to lead them to freedom from Babylon by making an alliance with Egypt (2 Kgs 24:1). But help from Egypt did not come (v 7).<\/p>\n<p>In 599 <span>BC<\/span>, Nebuchadnezzar armed those surrounding the rebel Jewish kingdom to harass the Jews, which they willingly did (2 Kgs 24:2). Evidently Jehoiakim lost his life in one of these raids. Since the people despised him, his body was thrown out without honorable burial, as Jeremiah had predicted (Jer 22:19).<\/p>\n<p>Ministry during the Reign of Zedekiah<\/p>\n<p>Nebuchadnezzar’s siege of Jerusalem in 598 <span>BC<\/span> lasted only a short time because the new king, Jehoiachin, crowned at age 18, knew resistance was useless. He gave himself up, with all his family and court, in March of 597 <span>BC<\/span>, after serving as king about three months. The Babylonian Chronicle reads: “He [Nebuchadnezzar] seized the city and captured the king.”<\/p>\n<p>Jehoiachin was carried to Babylon along with 8,000 (2 Kgs 24:16; cf. v 14) officers, artisans, and executives (Ezekiel among them) and much booty. In his place Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, Jehoiachin’s uncle, to rule. Zedekiah proceeded to organize his government with the less capable and inexperienced help left after the deportation.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah took up his thankless ministry, calling on the Jews to believe God, obey the laws of Babylon, and reject false hopes in Egypt. Zedekiah turned a deaf ear to these appeals, listening rather to the unwise advice of his counselors (Jer 37:1-2). During the first year of Zedekiah’s rule, Jeremiah received the vision of the two baskets of figs. The Jews carried to Babylon were like good figs, while Zedekiah and those who trusted in Egypt were like rotten figs (24:1-8). The reason for this reproachful description was that the Jews began plotting rebellion against Babylon along with Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Sidon from the beginning of the reign of Zedekiah (27:1-3), thus breaking their oath of loyalty to Nebuchadnezzar and repudiating God’s message through Jeremiah.<\/p>\n<p>In Egypt the pharaoh began to renew plans to organize dissidents within the Babylonian Empire to revolt. He hired Jewish soldiers to aid him in protecting his southern border. The Jewish soldiers settled on a Nile island called Elephantine, or Yeb (593–410 <span>BC<\/span>). Jeremiah addressed an oracle to these Jews (ch 44). The treaty for Jews to help in Egypt evidently also assumed that Egyptians would aid Israel. When the Babylonians besieged Jerusalem in 589, Pharaoh Hophra came to the aid of Zedekiah. Nebuchadnezzar, ruling from Riblah, commanded that the siege against Jerusalem be lifted in order to make a surprise attack on Hophra (37:5). The release gave Jeremiah an opportunity to journey to Anathoth to secure some family property (v 12). However, Irijah, captain of the guard, arrested Jeremiah in the Gate of Benjamin for defecting to the enemy, and he was beaten and flung into a dungeon. King Zedekiah brought him out after many days to obtain a prognostication. With characteristic boldness, Jeremiah told the king he would shortly become a captive. At the same time, Jeremiah requested relief from injustice for himself. He gained part of his request but continued as prisoner in the court of the guard.<\/p>\n<p>The Babylonian army chased Pharaoh Hophra back to Egypt and returned to crush Jerusalem without further mercy. The siege, which began in 589 <span>BC<\/span>, was restored with rigor in January of 588, Zedekiah’s ninth year (39:1). During this time, the Lord gave Jeremiah foreknowledge of a visit from a cousin who wished to sell a field near Anathoth (32:7-9; cf. 37:12). Jeremiah bought the field as an object lesson to verify the message of restoration after a captivity of 70 years (29:10).<\/p>\n<p>The armies of Babylon cut off all supplies from Jerusalem and were able to destroy the last two outlying Jewish fortresses of Lachish and Azekah (34:7). Food became scarce. Disease spread. Undisposed-of sewage and impure cistern water caused pestilence. With increased distress came Jeremiah’s increased appeal for the city to surrender.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah remained in the prison court until the Babylonians breached the city wall in July of 586 <span>BC<\/span>. The king escaped by night and succeeded in reaching the plains of Jericho but was captured there and taken to Riblah. Zedekiah’s family and counselors were killed; he himself was blinded and taken in chains to Babylon, where he died soon after (39:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Back in Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general, sent most of the Jews into captivity. Jeremiah, however, was granted special consideration; after being released from prison, he was placed under the care of Gedaliah, son of Ahikam.<\/p>\n<p>After the Fall of Jerusalem<\/p>\n<p>A month after the fall of Jerusalem, the city was burned and the walls broken down. Gedaliah was appointed governor of the remaining agricultural community, with headquarters at Mizpah. Jeremiah returned to Jerusalem, where, according to tradition, he took up his abode in a grotto near what is now known as Gordon’s Calvary. There he wrote the book of Lamentations.<\/p>\n<p>The Ammonite king Baalis, plotting rebellion against Babylon, instigated the murder of Gedaliah (40:13). In the reaction that followed, the remaining people followed the leader Johanan ben Kareah to a camp near Bethlehem, intending to go to Egypt. They asked Jeremiah, at Jerusalem, to give guidance from the Lord, promising obedience. Jeremiah’s message required that they remain in Israel and not go to Egypt. Disobedience was complete and immediate. Fearing Babylon, they departed from Judah, taking Jeremiah with them, and entered Egypt (41:16–43:7).<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah did not stop his ministry in Egypt. His message at Tahpanhes (43:8-12) assured a victorious conquest of the land by Nebuchadnezzar, which took place in 568–567 <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Jews from all parts of Egypt gathered to discuss their future as exiles. Jeremiah took the opportunity to denounce their idolatry. Jewish women as well as men argued that they had enjoyed prosperity while serving idols but had suffered since stopping. Jeremiah condemned their obdurate blindness to reality and gave God’s indictment. For a verifying sign, Jeremiah predicted that Pharaoh Hophra of Egypt would be assassinated (44:30), which happened in 466 <span>BC<\/span>. No later record of Jeremiah’s acts exists in the Bible. Tradition says Jeremiah was stoned to death by the people of the Jewish exile settlement in Tahpanhes.<\/p>\n<p>Though Jeremiah suffered continued rejection during his life, he has been honored by numerous apocryphal and traditional embellishments to his history. Jesus could well have had Jeremiah in mind when he said, “You build tombs for the prophets your ancestors killed and decorate the graves of the godly people your ancestors destroyed. . . . [You are] the descendants of those who murdered the prophets” (Mt 23:29-31, <span>nlt<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Israel, History of; Jeremiah, Book of; Prophet, Prophetess.<\/p>\n<li>2. Family head in the Transjordan portion of Manasseh whom Tiglath-pileser took captive (1 Chr 5:23-26; cf. 2 Kgs 15:29).<\/li>\n<li>3. Father of Hamutal, a wife of King Josiah (2 Kgs 23:31; 24:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Ambidextrous Benjamite bowman and slinger who joined David at Ziklag (1 Chr 12:4).<\/li>\n<li>5, 6. Two Gadite soldiers who joined David’s army (1 Chr 12:10, 13).<\/li>\n<li>7. Postexilic priest who with Nehemiah set his seal to the covenant, renewing the people’s promise to obey God’s laws (Neh 10:2). He is mentioned again (12:34) as part of the procession for the dedication of the new wall of Jerusalem.<\/li>\n<li>8. Priest who returned from exile with Zerubbabel (Neh 12:1) and became head of a family of priests (v 12).<\/li>\n<li>9. Father of Jaazaniah, a Recabite who refused to drink wine (Jer 35:3).<\/li>","summary_ro":"JEREMIAH (Person) 1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv. Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Je...","summary_en":"JEREMIAH (Person) 1. Prophet to Judah before its fall in 586 BC; his name is also spelled “Jeremias” (Mt 16:14) and “Jeremy” (Mt 2:17; 27:9) in the kjv. Jeremiah was born in the village of Anathoth, about three miles (4.8 kilometers) northeast of Jerusalem. His father’s name was Hilkiah, and he belonged to the tribe of Benjamin. His call came in the 13th year of King Josiah (640–609 BC). He refers to himself as “a child” when called (Jer 1:6), but the Hebrew word is not the same as used in Je...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19101,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jeremias*","title_en":"Jeremias*","content_ro":"<h3>JEREMIAS*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV spelling of Jeremiah in Matthew 16:14. <em>See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JEREMIAS*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV spelling of Jeremiah in Matthew 16:14. <em>See<\/em> Jeremiah (Person) #1.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JEREMIAS* KJV spelling of Jeremiah in Matthew 16:14. See Jeremiah (Person) #1.","summary_en":"JEREMIAS* KJV spelling of Jeremiah in Matthew 16:14. See Jeremiah (Person) #1.","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":31578,"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":54814,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","summary_en":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82440,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","summary_en":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110066,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","summary_en":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137692,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:14<\/strong> <em>Some<\/em><em>,<\/em> such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was <em>John the Baptist<\/em> resurrected. • <em>Elijah<\/em> was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • <em>Jeremiah or one of the other prophets:<\/em> Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see <em>2 Maccabees<\/em> 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","summary_en":"16:14 Some, such as Herod Antipas (14:1-2), thought Jesus was John the Baptist resurrected. • Elijah was expected as a forerunner to the Messiah (11:14; 17:10-12; Mal 3:1; 4:5-6). • Jeremiah or one of the other prophets: Some Jews expected Jeremiah to be raised (see 2 Maccabees 15:13-16). Jesus’ strong stand on sensitive matters (Matt 5:17; 15:1-20) may have led some to think Jesus was Jeremiah. Jesus was not yet understood as God’s Messiah.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":42123,"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":69749,"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":97375,"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":125001,"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":65554,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93180,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120806,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148432,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Encounters with Jesus","title_en":"Encounters with Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Encounters with Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too heavy and distracting to carry into Kingdom service. To follow Jesus, those who encounter him usually have to abandon something and leave it behind. Those who cannot give up what this world offers are often forced to turn away from Jesus. The same choice faces all who encounter Jesus in the Gospels and hear his invitation to follow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Andrew<\/strong> was a fisherman in Galilee, but he longed for the Messiah and his Kingdom. He followed John the Baptist until John pointed to Jesus. Then Andrew not only followed Jesus, but called others, including Peter, to come too. <em>See John 1:29-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simeon and Anna<\/strong> had long waited to see the promised Messiah. When they saw the infant Jesus, they recognized him as the Messiah, blessed him, and praised God for his coming and the hope he brought. <em>See Luke 2:25-38<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nathanael<\/strong> responded skeptically when he was first invited to meet Jesus, but when Jesus demonstrated that he already knew him, Nathanael’s response dramatically changed, and he followed Jesus without hesitation. <em>See John 1:43-51<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A rich man<\/strong> came to Jesus and asked what he should do to inherit eternal life. This man demonstrated humility and was careful to obey all God’s laws. Jesus loved this man but told him that he still needed to sell all his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The man was unwilling to abandon his wealth and in sadness walked away from Jesus. <em>See Mark 10:17-22<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Matthew<\/strong> had turned from his Jewish heritage, become a traitor to his people by collecting Roman taxes, and chosen a lifestyle of wealthy indulgence. When Jesus called him, Matthew left his old life and followed. Before joining Jesus in his travels, Matthew invited his friends to meet Jesus. <em>See Matthew 9:9-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Thomas<\/strong> doubted the other disciples’ claim that Jesus had come back to life. When Jesus finally appeared to Thomas, he singled Thomas out and asked him to touch his wounded, resurrected body. Thomas immediately bowed before Jesus and confessed what he believed—that Jesus was his Lord and God. <em>See John 20:19-29<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Martha<\/strong> was working hard to prepare a meal for Jesus in her home and became upset that her sister Mary was sitting and learning at Jesus’ feet. Jesus gently encouraged Martha not to be angry and pointed out that Mary had chosen best by stopping to listen. On a later occasion, Jesus confronted Martha to affirm faith in him for eternal life. <em>See Luke 10:38-42; John 11:17-27<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Roman officer<\/strong> asked Jesus to save his dying slave but excused Jesus from coming to his unclean Gentile home, because he believed Jesus could heal his slave from where he stood. Jesus honored this Roman’s faith by doing just that. Jesus also affirmed that many Gentiles would be welcomed by faith into the Kingdom of Heaven. <em>See Matthew 8:5-13<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A woman caught in adultery<\/strong> was brought by Jewish leaders to Jesus for judgment. Stoning was the expected punishment, but Jesus, writing in the dust, asked any accuser without sin to throw the first stone. When they all walked away, Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more. <em>See John 8:1-11<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Nicodemus<\/strong>, a leading Pharisee, was cautious about being seen with Jesus, so he came to him at night. Jesus engaged Nicodemus and challenged his assumptions about spiritual truth. Nicodemus later defended Jesus in the Council. After the crucifixion, he helped to bury Jesus, revealing his commitment. <em>See John 3:1-21; 7:50-52; 19:38-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>James and John<\/strong> believed God’s Kingdom was at hand, and they requested places of honor, angering the other disciples. Jesus gently explained that true leadership is demonstrated through service, not wealth or power. The disciples would all learn this through hard experience. <em>See Mark 10:35-45; John 13:1-17<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The people of Nazareth<\/strong> had known Jesus as Joseph’s son and couldn’t believe he could be the Messiah. Their doubt greatly limited Jesus’ miracles among them, and their anger at his claims forced him to leave. <em>See Luke 4:14-30<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>The religious leaders<\/strong> knew and obeyed external laws down to fine detail but failed to show love in more important ways. Over and over again, Jesus confronted them for this, but most of these leaders rejected Jesus’ criticism and looked for ways to destroy him. <em>See Luke 11:37-54; cp. Acts 6:8–8:1; 9:1-31<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Zacchaeus<\/strong> collected taxes for Rome, becoming wealthy at his people’s expense. He was curious about Jesus and climbed a tree to see him over the crowd. Jesus singled him out, went to his house, and called Zacchaeus to a new life. Zacchaeus repented of his ways and paid back everyone he had wronged. <em>See Luke 19:1-10<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Two followers of Jesus<\/strong> were returning home to Emmaus after Jesus’ death. Along the way, the resurrected Jesus joined them and explained from Scripture why he had died. They didn’t recognize Jesus until he broke bread with them, after which Jesus disappeared. The two joyfully went to tell the disciples that Jesus was alive. <em>See Luke 24:13-35<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>A Samaritan woman<\/strong> of ill-repute went to Jacob’s well to draw water and found Jesus there. Jesus offered her living water and a new life. She was surprised but responded in faith and called others to meet the Messiah they longed for. <em>See John 4:1-42<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Pilate<\/strong> was pressured by the Jewish leaders to execute Jesus. He believed Jesus was innocent and sought to free him. Pilate asked Jesus, “What is truth?” but did not realize that Jesus himself was the Truth. In the end, Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified to keep the peace. <em>See John 18:28–19:16<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Simon Peter<\/strong> denied three times that he even knew Jesus. After his resurrection, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. Each time, Peter reaffirmed his love, and Jesus told him to feed his sheep. Thus, Jesus restored Peter. <em>See John 21:1-23; see also Matt 16:15-19<\/em><\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 8:5-13; 9:9-13; 16:15-19; Mark 10:17-22, 35-45; Luke 2:25-38; 4:14-30; 10:38-42; 11:37-54; 19:1-10; 24:13-35; John 1:29-42, 43-51; 3:1-21; 4:1-42; 7:50-52; 8:1-11; 11:17-27; 13:1-17; 18:28–19:16; 19:38-42; 20:19-29; 21:1-23<\/p>","summary_ro":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","summary_en":"Encounters with Jesus Jesus’ dramatic miracles and intriguing parables can overshadow his transformative encounters with individuals. In these encounters Jesus deals with people where they are and as they are. He invites people of all backgrounds, personalities, and commitments to embrace him as master and friend, to become his followers and ambassadors of his eternal Kingdom. But Jesus’ invitation to follow always comes with a choice, because the power and wealth of this world is often too h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":42158,"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":69784,"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":97410,"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":125036,"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":636,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Adoption","title_en":"Adoption","content_ro":"<h3>ADOPTION<\/h3>\n<p>Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common <span>kjv<\/span> expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, <span>kjv<\/span>); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoption through which this happens has its origin in God’s love and its foundation in Jesus Christ who is uniquely the Son of God. Theologians regard the term “Son of God” as referring preeminently to Christ’s deity (Mt 11:25-27; 16:16-17), for he is one in substance and glory with the Father. As the second person of the Trinity, Christ is distinguished from the Father as “the only begotten Son.” Believers in Christ, although “adopted,” are never seen as on a par with the uncreated, divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, in the beloved Son, sinners have been loved and predestined by God the Father to become his children by adoption (Eph 1:4-6). That adoption is secured by Christ the Redeemer; through his death and resurrection he destroyed sin and its death penalty, restoring the righteousness and life requisite for the status of sonship. Christ is the head of the “new covenant” as its mediator and guarantor. His brothers and sisters, as its beneficiaries, become God’s heirs, and his joint heirs (Rom 8:17). God gives to them the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of his Son, as the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). The indwelling Spirit gives believers assurance that they are indeed God’s children and enables them to cry out to God as Father (Rom 8:15-16). Such intimacy with the Creator and Savior in prayer is one privilege of adoption.<\/p>\n<p>Adoption was a privilege given to God’s people under the “old covenant” (Rom 9:4). Both Israel as a whole and individual Israelites knew God as Father (Is 64:8-9; Hos 11:1). Since the NT regards adoption as ultimately possible only through Jesus Christ, Israel’s adoption before the Incarnation was an under-age sonship comparable to the status of servanthood (Gal 4:1-7). In Jesus the privilege of mature sonship was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles (Gal 3:25-29). Though adoption is a benefit enjoyed in the present experience of God’s people (1 Jn 3:1), its full extent is realized only at their resurrection from the dead (Rom 8:21-23).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ADOPTION<\/h3>\n<p>Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common <span>kjv<\/span> expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18).<\/p>\n<p>According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, <span>kjv<\/span>); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoption through which this happens has its origin in God’s love and its foundation in Jesus Christ who is uniquely the Son of God. Theologians regard the term “Son of God” as referring preeminently to Christ’s deity (Mt 11:25-27; 16:16-17), for he is one in substance and glory with the Father. As the second person of the Trinity, Christ is distinguished from the Father as “the only begotten Son.” Believers in Christ, although “adopted,” are never seen as on a par with the uncreated, divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, in the beloved Son, sinners have been loved and predestined by God the Father to become his children by adoption (Eph 1:4-6). That adoption is secured by Christ the Redeemer; through his death and resurrection he destroyed sin and its death penalty, restoring the righteousness and life requisite for the status of sonship. Christ is the head of the “new covenant” as its mediator and guarantor. His brothers and sisters, as its beneficiaries, become God’s heirs, and his joint heirs (Rom 8:17). God gives to them the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of his Son, as the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6). The indwelling Spirit gives believers assurance that they are indeed God’s children and enables them to cry out to God as Father (Rom 8:15-16). Such intimacy with the Creator and Savior in prayer is one privilege of adoption.<\/p>\n<p>Adoption was a privilege given to God’s people under the “old covenant” (Rom 9:4). Both Israel as a whole and individual Israelites knew God as Father (Is 64:8-9; Hos 11:1). Since the NT regards adoption as ultimately possible only through Jesus Christ, Israel’s adoption before the Incarnation was an under-age sonship comparable to the status of servanthood (Gal 4:1-7). In Jesus the privilege of mature sonship was extended to include both Jews and Gentiles (Gal 3:25-29). Though adoption is a benefit enjoyed in the present experience of God’s people (1 Jn 3:1), its full extent is realized only at their resurrection from the dead (Rom 8:21-23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"ADOPTION Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common kjv expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18). According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, kjv); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoptio...","summary_en":"ADOPTION Theologically, the act of God by which believers become members of “God’s family” with all the privileges and obligations of family membership. “Sons of God,” a common kjv expression, includes individuals of both sexes numbered among God’s children (Is 43:6; 2 Cor 6:18). According to the NT, all persons are sinners by nature, and hence are called “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3, kjv); however, those upon whom God bestows his love become “children of God” by grace (1 Jn 3:1). The adoptio...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4761,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4952,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Loosing*, Binding","title_en":"and Loosing*, Binding","content_ro":"<h3>BINDING AND LOOSING*<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples (18:18).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is the only Gospel writer to record those specific words of Jesus. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus addressed similar but not identical words to the disciples after the resurrection: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn 20:23, <span>rsv<\/span>). A problem arises in identifying both the nature and the extent of the authority Jesus gave.<\/p>\n<p>“Bind” and “loose” translate two Greek words, themselves translations of words in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. Among Jesus’ Jewish contemporaries, the two Aramaic words were often used as technical rabbinic terms. They referred to the verdict of a teacher of the Law who, on the basis of his authority as an expert in the interpretation of the Mosaic law, could declare some action “bound” (forbidden) or “loosed” (permitted). (Compare Mt 23:2-3, where Jesus said: “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you,” <span>rsv<\/span>.) Among the greatest Jewish rabbis, Shammai “bound” many actions that the more liberal teacher Hillel “loosed.”<\/p>\n<p>Alongside that scribal use of the terms was their use in judicial contexts. They referred to the imposition or the removal of a ban or judgment. In that context the words meant “to condemn; imprison” and “to absolve; set free.” Both sets of meanings have been used to interpret the two texts in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>The precise meaning of the words in Matthew must be understood on the basis of their use in specific situations and in the light of the general NT understanding of apostolic authority. In Matthew 16:19 Peter’s authority to bind and loose is connected with his receiving “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Gospels the “kingdom of heaven” (that is, kingdom of God) is the sphere of God’s rule, the “community” of people whom he rules as Lord. In a figurative sense, Peter was entrusted with the keys to that kingdom, that “building.” (See 1 Cor 3:9, 16-17; Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pt 2:4-5 for the idea of the people of God as his building.) The keys symbolize the authority entrusted to Peter as the one who confessed Jesus as Lord (Mt 16:16), and as the one who represents all those disciples who utter the same confession.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:13, the scribes were understood as guardians of the kingdom, since the knowledge of God had been entrusted to them (Lk 11:52). But they did not fulfill their trust; they shut the doors of the kingdom. Therefore, their task was transferred to Peter, spokesman for the 12 disciples, who were representatives of a new Israel (see Mt 21:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Keys of the Kingdom.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BINDING AND LOOSING*<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples (18:18).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is the only Gospel writer to record those specific words of Jesus. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus addressed similar but not identical words to the disciples after the resurrection: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn 20:23, <span>rsv<\/span>). A problem arises in identifying both the nature and the extent of the authority Jesus gave.<\/p>\n<p>“Bind” and “loose” translate two Greek words, themselves translations of words in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. Among Jesus’ Jewish contemporaries, the two Aramaic words were often used as technical rabbinic terms. They referred to the verdict of a teacher of the Law who, on the basis of his authority as an expert in the interpretation of the Mosaic law, could declare some action “bound” (forbidden) or “loosed” (permitted). (Compare Mt 23:2-3, where Jesus said: “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you,” <span>rsv<\/span>.) Among the greatest Jewish rabbis, Shammai “bound” many actions that the more liberal teacher Hillel “loosed.”<\/p>\n<p>Alongside that scribal use of the terms was their use in judicial contexts. They referred to the imposition or the removal of a ban or judgment. In that context the words meant “to condemn; imprison” and “to absolve; set free.” Both sets of meanings have been used to interpret the two texts in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>The precise meaning of the words in Matthew must be understood on the basis of their use in specific situations and in the light of the general NT understanding of apostolic authority. In Matthew 16:19 Peter’s authority to bind and loose is connected with his receiving “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Gospels the “kingdom of heaven” (that is, kingdom of God) is the sphere of God’s rule, the “community” of people whom he rules as Lord. In a figurative sense, Peter was entrusted with the keys to that kingdom, that “building.” (See 1 Cor 3:9, 16-17; Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pt 2:4-5 for the idea of the people of God as his building.) The keys symbolize the authority entrusted to Peter as the one who confessed Jesus as Lord (Mt 16:16), and as the one who represents all those disciples who utter the same confession.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:13, the scribes were understood as guardians of the kingdom, since the knowledge of God had been entrusted to them (Lk 11:52). But they did not fulfill their trust; they shut the doors of the kingdom. Therefore, their task was transferred to Peter, spokesman for the 12 disciples, who were representatives of a new Israel (see Mt 21:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Keys of the Kingdom.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BINDING AND LOOSING* Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, rsv). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples ...","summary_en":"BINDING AND LOOSING* Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, rsv). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6322,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christ","title_en":"Christ","content_ro":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">Christos<\/span><em>,<\/em> which translates Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Messiah<\/span> (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the title is used in combination with the given name, as “Jesus Christ” (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Rom 1:4), “Christ Jesus” (<span>niv<\/span> Rom 1:1; 1 Cor 1:1), with the article “the” (Rom 7:4), or with another title “Lord” (Rom 16:18). It is also used alone as the one favored substitute name or title for Jesus (Jn 20:31; Rom 15:3; Heb 3:6; 5:5; 1 Pt 1:11, 19).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospels portray Jesus as modestly accepting the title and role of the Messiah. His baptism should be understood as his anointing to the threefold office of prophet, priest, and king. At his baptism by John (the new Elijah, Mt 11:14), Jesus received the outpouring of the Spirit and God’s mandate to begin his ministry (Mt 3:16–4:17). John himself denied being the anointed one but tacitly identified Jesus as the Christ (Jn 1:20; Lk 3:14-17). Jesus’ first disciples followed him because they knew he was the Messiah (Jn 1:41). The demons recognized him as “the Holy One [anointed] of God” (Mk 1:24; cf. Mt 8:29). The crowds followed him as the Prophet, the new Moses (Jn 6:14, 32), but deserted him when they understood that his kingdom was a spiritual, not a political realm (v 66). The Twelve remained loyal, saying, “We believe . . . you are the Holy One of God” (Jn 6:69, <span>niv<\/span>). The confession of the disciples voiced by Peter and approved by Jesus as a divine revelation is “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16, <span>niv<\/span>). At his trials the decisive factor in Jesus’ condemnation was his claim to be the Christ (Mt 26:63-64, 68; 27:11, 17, 22, 37).<\/p>\n<p>An important feature in the earliest Christian preaching was the proclamation that Jesus is the Christ (Acts 2:36; 3:18-20; 9:22; 28:23, 31). This remains the earliest (Mt 16:16) and most basic article of Christian confession (1 Cor 1:23; 1 Jn 5:1), affirming that Jesus perfectly fulfilled the role of anointed prophet, priest, and king as the servant of God for his people (Lk 7:16; 1 Cor 15:25; Heb 7:22-28; Rv 19:16).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","summary_en":"CHRIST Official title given to Jesus in the NT. It signifies his office as anointed Savior and alludes to his spiritual qualifications for the task of saving his people. The word derives from Greek Christos, which translates Hebrew Messiah (Jn 1:41). Both terms come from verbs meaning “to anoint with sacred oil”; hence, as titles they mean “the Anointed One.” Applied to Jesus, they express the conviction that he had divine appointment for his office and function. In the NT the title is used i...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6338,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Christology*","title_en":"Christology*","content_ro":"<h3>CHRISTOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of the essential deity of Jesus as the Son of God. As such he was declared to be of one essence with the Father and the Spirit (the dogma of the Trinity promulgated at Nicaea, <span>AD<\/span> 325). Since this affirmation was made with reference to the man Jesus of Nazareth, it forced upon the church, inescapably, the further question: How could one and the same person be both God and man? How could he who is infinite become finite; he who is eternal become temporal; he who is God become man?<\/p>\n<p>To answer this question, the church embraced the doctrine of the Incarnation. The statement of the doctrine was arrived at only after much controversy. In the course of the debate the church rejected all efforts, on the one hand, to preserve the deity of the Son at the expense of his humanity (docetism), and on the other, to preserve his humanity at the expense of his deity (adoptionism). In the former category were the doctrines of those who claimed that the Son only <em>seemed<\/em> to have a human body, or (like the Apollinarians) that while he had a true body and soul, the divine Logos took the place of the human spirit. In the latter category was the doctrine of those who claimed that the man Jesus, through the process of moral development, was elevated to divine sonship and so adopted into the Godhead. Some placed great stress on Jesus’ endowment with the Spirit at baptism as the moment of his adoption, while others, citing Acts 13:33—“today I have begotten thee”—believed Jesus became the unique Son of God at the resurrection. The church also rejected all attempts to resolve the problem of the Savior’s divinity and humanity by suggesting that he was both a divine person and a human person (Nestorianism) or, contrariwise, that the unity of his person implied a fusion of the divine and human in one nature (monophysitism).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheChalcedonianCreed\">The Chalcedonian Creed<\/p>\n<p>At the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451), the position was adopted that the Lord Jesus Christ was truly God and truly man <em>(vere Deo, vere homo).<\/em> The creed said:<\/p>\n<p>[He is] consubstantial with the Father as to his Godhead, and consubstantial also with us as to his manhood; like unto us in all things, yet without sin; as to his Godhead, begotten of the Father before all worlds; but as to his manhood, in these days, born for us men and for our salvation, of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without conversion, without severance, and without division; the distinction of the natures being in no wise abolished by their union, but the peculiarity of each nature being maintained, and both concurring in one person and subsistence. We confess not a Son divided and sundered into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only-begotten, and God-Logos, our Lord Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This confession was adopted in all its essential features by the Reformers at the time of the Protestant Reformation.<\/p>\n<p>Chalcedonian Christology does not remove the mystery of the Incarnation but rather indicates, as it were, the boundaries of believing thought about the person of the Redeemer, boundaries that have proved significant in the history of Christian thought. As for the key terms in the creed, the following should be noted: the word “nature” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">physis<\/span><em>)<\/em> as used by the church fathers does not have reference to the physical, material order that is the object of investigation by the “natural” sciences. “Nature” rather refers to being or reality in distinction from appearance. To say that Jesus Christ has a divine nature is to affirm that all the qualities, properties, or attributes by which one describes the divine order of being pertain to him. In short, he is God himself, not <em>like<\/em> God, but just <em>God.<\/em> So also with the affirmation that Christ has a human nature. Christ is not God <em>appearing<\/em> as a man; he <em>is<\/em> a man. He is not <em>only<\/em> a man nor <em>only<\/em> God; he is the God who <em>became<\/em> a man. He did not cease to be God when he became a man; he did not exchange divinity for humanity. Rather, he assumed humanity, so that he is now both divine and human. He is the God-man.<\/p>\n<p>The term “person” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hypostasis<\/span><em>)<\/em> was used by the fathers to describe Jesus Christ as a self-conscious, self-determined Subject, one who designates himself by the word “I” over against a “thou.” The Mediator between God and man is <em>a person<\/em> who has a divine nature and a human nature. While there can be no “person” where there is no “nature,” it does not follow that there is no distinction between the terms, for there can be a “nature,” as defined above, where there is no “person.” (An object may have the properties of “nature” of a stone: grayness, hardness, roundness, smoothness. But this object, which has the “nature” of a stone, is not a “person”; it is not self-conscious and self-determined.)<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between the “person” and the “nature” of the incarnate Christ speaks of him as being a “person” with a “divine nature” and a “human nature.” The fathers were teaching through this that while we must ascribe to Christ all the qualities that belong to the divine order of being and to the human order of being (including bodily, physical, objective being—the Word “became flesh,” Jn 1:14), we cannot say that he is “two persons.” He is a divine person with a human nature, not a human person as such. All human persons have a first moment. Wheresoever and whensoever we may identify that first moment for a human “I,” whether at conception or at fetal quickening in the womb, whether at the moment of birth, or even as late as the first moment of self-awareness in the young child, no human “I” is aware of himself as a “subject,” as an “I,” before he is conceived in the womb of his mother. The man Jesus of Nazareth, however, unlike any mere man, could say, “Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). This affirmation is neither the late theological invention of Christian fancy nor the claim of a man suffering from delusions of grandeur, but rather the sober truth. This person sitting on a mountainside preaching, this person standing by the sea calling fishermen to be his disciples, is a person who always was a person, even before there were any fishermen by the sea to call or any people to preach to on the mountainside—in fact, before there was any sea or any mountain.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is not the divine Logos, who inspires and uniquely endows the man, Jesus of Nazareth, with moral and religious insights. Rather, this man Jesus is the eternal Son of God, and God’s eternal Son has become this man, Jesus. The Son of God did not assume a man’s <em>person<\/em> to his own <em>nature,<\/em> but a man’s <em>nature<\/em> to his own <em>person.<\/em> He continues to be the same person, though he now assumes our humanity. Hence, he can speak both as a Subject consciously in history and as a Subject consciously transcending history, even in one and the same sentence. <em>“I<\/em> have glorified thee <em>on the earth: I<\/em> have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which <em>I<\/em> had with thee <em>before the world was”<\/em> (Jn 17:4-5, <span>kjv<\/span>, emphasis added). Here the same person, Jesus, speaks as a person in the world, an “I” who has done certain things in the world, and as a person before there was any world, an “I” who shared his glory with a “thou” whom he calls “Father” before all time. All efforts at rational analysis of this mystery, which the church designates by the word “incarnation,” run the risk of losing the truth by explaining it. One arrives at a position in which Christ is a divine being who appears human (docetism) or a human being who either achieves divine status for himself (adoptionism) or divine worth for us (Ritschlianism).<\/p>\n<p>In order to preserve fully both our Lord’s deity and his humanity, the creed employs four terms in which we are told what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation. The union of the two natures is declared to be “without confusion,” “without conversion,” “without separation,” and “without division.” Some have ridiculed these “four bald negatives,” but they are by no means wholly without value. Should any of these basic negatives be violated, we would lose what is essential to Christian faith, the “one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, complete as to his Godhead, and complete as to his manhood.”<\/p>\n<p>But the creed contains not only a negative affirmation—what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation; it also contains a positive affirmation. The union of the two natures concurs in one Person, who is the eternal Son of the Father. The union, then, of the divine and the human in Christ is a personal one; more specifically, the union is the act of the divine Person who is the Son of God. Here we approach the very heart of the mystery of the Incarnation. No one can say how the infinite God could become a finite man. Naturally, however, theologians have thought a great deal about the matter; Chalcedon does not mark the end of all inquiry.<\/p>\n<p>In theological parlance it has become customary to speak of the union of the divine and the human in the Person of the incarnate Redeemer as the “hypostatic” union <em>(unio hypostatica),<\/em> from the Greek word for “person.” It is important to note not only <em>that<\/em> the union is personal, but also <em>why<\/em> it is so. Theologians speak of the union as personal because it is the act of a Person, namely the Son of God, the Word who became flesh. This means that the Person of the incarnate Redeemer is divine, the object of Christian worship. He cannot, then, be a mere human being as other men are mere human beings. To worship one who is a man and only a man would be idolatry. And because this personal union of the divine and the human is truly a <em>union,<\/em> the Redeemer is one Person, not two. If to worship a human person would be idolatry, to worship two persons—one human, one divine—would be an absurdity. This Person, who unites in himself the divine and the human, is often described by theologians as a “theanthropic” person, the God-man. If one does not mean that he is a hybrid—half God, half man—then this mode of speaking is unobjectionable inasmuch as it simply says that this Person, Jesus Christ, is both divine and human, which is what the creed intends.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristologyafterChalcedon\">Christology after Chalcedon<\/p>\n<p>Matters become more difficult and unanimity less in evidence, however, when the question is raised as to the personal qualities of Christ’s humanity. The formulation most consistent with Chalcedon and generally held by Protestants speaks of the “impersonal humanity” of our Lord. It has also been defended in modern times by the Swiss theologians Karl Barth and Emil Brunner and by G. C. Berkouwer of the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<p>Actually the meaning of the phrase “impersonal humanity” <em>(impersonalitas)<\/em> is not that in the case of the incarnate Son there is no manifestation of the personal at the human level. Rather, it means that this humanity, of itself, has no independent existence apart from the divine Person who assumed this humanity in the act of becoming incarnate. So far as Jesus of Nazareth is concerned, that which is human exists in and through the Word who is God himself. There is a sense in which God is present to <em>all<\/em> created reality (the doctrine of the divine immanence). But howsoever we may conceive of this divine presence of power (providence) and of grace (salvation), there can be no thought of <em>identity<\/em> between God and the creature. Even when the church, following the usage of the NT, speaks of the Christian as “indwelt by the Holy Spirit,” there is no identity of <em>being<\/em> affirmed; there is no ontological union of the human and the divine. But in the case of the man Jesus Christ, something absolutely unique is affirmed: this man is declared to be identical with God because he, the Person, is the “Word who was made flesh and dwelt among us.” “Therefore,” says Barth, “he does not only live through God and with God; he is himself God. Nor is he autonomous and self-existent. His reality, existence and being are wholly and absolutely that of God himself, the God who acts in his Word. His manhood is only the predicate of his Godhead, or better and more concretely, it is only the predicate, assumed in inconceivable condescension, of the Word acting upon us, the Word who is the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>In other words, Jesus our Lord is, as man, so united with God that he exists as man only and insofar as he exists as God. The doctrine of <em>anhypostasy<\/em> states this truth negatively. It affirms that the human nature of our Lord does not possess the mode of its being as personal in and of itself. The doctrine of <em>enhypostasy<\/em> states this truth positively. It affirms that the particular human nature that is our Lord’s acquires its personal mode of being by union with the personal Son of God. It is not Jesus of Nazareth who becomes the Son of God (adoptionism) but the Son of God who becomes Jesus of Nazareth. The Incarnation is a unique act of a divine Person, not a unique experience of the divine on the part of a human person. The Subject of the Incarnation is a divine Subject who acts, not a human subject who is acted upon. But inasmuch as the divine Subject, the eternal Son, so acts as to become this man, Jesus of Nazareth, this man is—not just symbolizes, but <em>is<\/em>—the Son of God as no other man is or ever can be the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural basis of the doctrine of the Incarnation includes, of course, the entire range of data in the Gospels as well as several passages in the Pauline Epistles, especially Philippians 2:6-8, which is, perhaps, the single most important christological passage in the NT. Here Paul, using the words of a primitive Christian confession, speaks of him “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Chalcedonian Creed does not resolve the mystery of the Incarnation, and theologians have made many efforts to better understand the mystery. One of the best known is based on an inference drawn from the passage quoted above. It is known as <em>kenosis,<\/em> the theory that when the Son became man, he emptied himself of some aspect of his divinity. The text of Philippians does not say that he emptied himself <em>of<\/em> anything, but only that he emptied <em>himself,<\/em> a striking figure of speech denoting condescension (“made himself of no reputation,” <span>kjv<\/span>). In spite of the exegetical difficulties in this statement, kenotic theory has persisted, in one form or another, especially in British theology. Another effort at understanding suggests that our Lord’s humanity was the <em>incognito<\/em> (Kierkegaard’s term) that hid his identity as a divine person from all but the eyes of faith. Thus, the Incarnation was a revelation that veils as well as discloses the truth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus; Word.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHRISTOLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of the essential deity of Jesus as the Son of God. As such he was declared to be of one essence with the Father and the Spirit (the dogma of the Trinity promulgated at Nicaea, <span>AD<\/span> 325). Since this affirmation was made with reference to the man Jesus of Nazareth, it forced upon the church, inescapably, the further question: How could one and the same person be both God and man? How could he who is infinite become finite; he who is eternal become temporal; he who is God become man?<\/p>\n<p>To answer this question, the church embraced the doctrine of the Incarnation. The statement of the doctrine was arrived at only after much controversy. In the course of the debate the church rejected all efforts, on the one hand, to preserve the deity of the Son at the expense of his humanity (docetism), and on the other, to preserve his humanity at the expense of his deity (adoptionism). In the former category were the doctrines of those who claimed that the Son only <em>seemed<\/em> to have a human body, or (like the Apollinarians) that while he had a true body and soul, the divine Logos took the place of the human spirit. In the latter category was the doctrine of those who claimed that the man Jesus, through the process of moral development, was elevated to divine sonship and so adopted into the Godhead. Some placed great stress on Jesus’ endowment with the Spirit at baptism as the moment of his adoption, while others, citing Acts 13:33—“today I have begotten thee”—believed Jesus became the unique Son of God at the resurrection. The church also rejected all attempts to resolve the problem of the Savior’s divinity and humanity by suggesting that he was both a divine person and a human person (Nestorianism) or, contrariwise, that the unity of his person implied a fusion of the divine and human in one nature (monophysitism).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheChalcedonianCreed\">The Chalcedonian Creed<\/p>\n<p>At the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451), the position was adopted that the Lord Jesus Christ was truly God and truly man <em>(vere Deo, vere homo).<\/em> The creed said:<\/p>\n<p>[He is] consubstantial with the Father as to his Godhead, and consubstantial also with us as to his manhood; like unto us in all things, yet without sin; as to his Godhead, begotten of the Father before all worlds; but as to his manhood, in these days, born for us men and for our salvation, of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, known in two natures, without confusion, without conversion, without severance, and without division; the distinction of the natures being in no wise abolished by their union, but the peculiarity of each nature being maintained, and both concurring in one person and subsistence. We confess not a Son divided and sundered into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only-begotten, and God-Logos, our Lord Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This confession was adopted in all its essential features by the Reformers at the time of the Protestant Reformation.<\/p>\n<p>Chalcedonian Christology does not remove the mystery of the Incarnation but rather indicates, as it were, the boundaries of believing thought about the person of the Redeemer, boundaries that have proved significant in the history of Christian thought. As for the key terms in the creed, the following should be noted: the word “nature” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">physis<\/span><em>)<\/em> as used by the church fathers does not have reference to the physical, material order that is the object of investigation by the “natural” sciences. “Nature” rather refers to being or reality in distinction from appearance. To say that Jesus Christ has a divine nature is to affirm that all the qualities, properties, or attributes by which one describes the divine order of being pertain to him. In short, he is God himself, not <em>like<\/em> God, but just <em>God.<\/em> So also with the affirmation that Christ has a human nature. Christ is not God <em>appearing<\/em> as a man; he <em>is<\/em> a man. He is not <em>only<\/em> a man nor <em>only<\/em> God; he is the God who <em>became<\/em> a man. He did not cease to be God when he became a man; he did not exchange divinity for humanity. Rather, he assumed humanity, so that he is now both divine and human. He is the God-man.<\/p>\n<p>The term “person” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hypostasis<\/span><em>)<\/em> was used by the fathers to describe Jesus Christ as a self-conscious, self-determined Subject, one who designates himself by the word “I” over against a “thou.” The Mediator between God and man is <em>a person<\/em> who has a divine nature and a human nature. While there can be no “person” where there is no “nature,” it does not follow that there is no distinction between the terms, for there can be a “nature,” as defined above, where there is no “person.” (An object may have the properties of “nature” of a stone: grayness, hardness, roundness, smoothness. But this object, which has the “nature” of a stone, is not a “person”; it is not self-conscious and self-determined.)<\/p>\n<p>The distinction between the “person” and the “nature” of the incarnate Christ speaks of him as being a “person” with a “divine nature” and a “human nature.” The fathers were teaching through this that while we must ascribe to Christ all the qualities that belong to the divine order of being and to the human order of being (including bodily, physical, objective being—the Word “became flesh,” Jn 1:14), we cannot say that he is “two persons.” He is a divine person with a human nature, not a human person as such. All human persons have a first moment. Wheresoever and whensoever we may identify that first moment for a human “I,” whether at conception or at fetal quickening in the womb, whether at the moment of birth, or even as late as the first moment of self-awareness in the young child, no human “I” is aware of himself as a “subject,” as an “I,” before he is conceived in the womb of his mother. The man Jesus of Nazareth, however, unlike any mere man, could say, “Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). This affirmation is neither the late theological invention of Christian fancy nor the claim of a man suffering from delusions of grandeur, but rather the sober truth. This person sitting on a mountainside preaching, this person standing by the sea calling fishermen to be his disciples, is a person who always was a person, even before there were any fishermen by the sea to call or any people to preach to on the mountainside—in fact, before there was any sea or any mountain.<\/p>\n<p>Christ is not the divine Logos, who inspires and uniquely endows the man, Jesus of Nazareth, with moral and religious insights. Rather, this man Jesus is the eternal Son of God, and God’s eternal Son has become this man, Jesus. The Son of God did not assume a man’s <em>person<\/em> to his own <em>nature,<\/em> but a man’s <em>nature<\/em> to his own <em>person.<\/em> He continues to be the same person, though he now assumes our humanity. Hence, he can speak both as a Subject consciously in history and as a Subject consciously transcending history, even in one and the same sentence. <em>“I<\/em> have glorified thee <em>on the earth: I<\/em> have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which <em>I<\/em> had with thee <em>before the world was”<\/em> (Jn 17:4-5, <span>kjv<\/span>, emphasis added). Here the same person, Jesus, speaks as a person in the world, an “I” who has done certain things in the world, and as a person before there was any world, an “I” who shared his glory with a “thou” whom he calls “Father” before all time. All efforts at rational analysis of this mystery, which the church designates by the word “incarnation,” run the risk of losing the truth by explaining it. One arrives at a position in which Christ is a divine being who appears human (docetism) or a human being who either achieves divine status for himself (adoptionism) or divine worth for us (Ritschlianism).<\/p>\n<p>In order to preserve fully both our Lord’s deity and his humanity, the creed employs four terms in which we are told what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation. The union of the two natures is declared to be “without confusion,” “without conversion,” “without separation,” and “without division.” Some have ridiculed these “four bald negatives,” but they are by no means wholly without value. Should any of these basic negatives be violated, we would lose what is essential to Christian faith, the “one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, complete as to his Godhead, and complete as to his manhood.”<\/p>\n<p>But the creed contains not only a negative affirmation—what did <em>not<\/em> happen in the Incarnation; it also contains a positive affirmation. The union of the two natures concurs in one Person, who is the eternal Son of the Father. The union, then, of the divine and the human in Christ is a personal one; more specifically, the union is the act of the divine Person who is the Son of God. Here we approach the very heart of the mystery of the Incarnation. No one can say how the infinite God could become a finite man. Naturally, however, theologians have thought a great deal about the matter; Chalcedon does not mark the end of all inquiry.<\/p>\n<p>In theological parlance it has become customary to speak of the union of the divine and the human in the Person of the incarnate Redeemer as the “hypostatic” union <em>(unio hypostatica),<\/em> from the Greek word for “person.” It is important to note not only <em>that<\/em> the union is personal, but also <em>why<\/em> it is so. Theologians speak of the union as personal because it is the act of a Person, namely the Son of God, the Word who became flesh. This means that the Person of the incarnate Redeemer is divine, the object of Christian worship. He cannot, then, be a mere human being as other men are mere human beings. To worship one who is a man and only a man would be idolatry. And because this personal union of the divine and the human is truly a <em>union,<\/em> the Redeemer is one Person, not two. If to worship a human person would be idolatry, to worship two persons—one human, one divine—would be an absurdity. This Person, who unites in himself the divine and the human, is often described by theologians as a “theanthropic” person, the God-man. If one does not mean that he is a hybrid—half God, half man—then this mode of speaking is unobjectionable inasmuch as it simply says that this Person, Jesus Christ, is both divine and human, which is what the creed intends.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChristologyafterChalcedon\">Christology after Chalcedon<\/p>\n<p>Matters become more difficult and unanimity less in evidence, however, when the question is raised as to the personal qualities of Christ’s humanity. The formulation most consistent with Chalcedon and generally held by Protestants speaks of the “impersonal humanity” of our Lord. It has also been defended in modern times by the Swiss theologians Karl Barth and Emil Brunner and by G. C. Berkouwer of the Netherlands.<\/p>\n<p>Actually the meaning of the phrase “impersonal humanity” <em>(impersonalitas)<\/em> is not that in the case of the incarnate Son there is no manifestation of the personal at the human level. Rather, it means that this humanity, of itself, has no independent existence apart from the divine Person who assumed this humanity in the act of becoming incarnate. So far as Jesus of Nazareth is concerned, that which is human exists in and through the Word who is God himself. There is a sense in which God is present to <em>all<\/em> created reality (the doctrine of the divine immanence). But howsoever we may conceive of this divine presence of power (providence) and of grace (salvation), there can be no thought of <em>identity<\/em> between God and the creature. Even when the church, following the usage of the NT, speaks of the Christian as “indwelt by the Holy Spirit,” there is no identity of <em>being<\/em> affirmed; there is no ontological union of the human and the divine. But in the case of the man Jesus Christ, something absolutely unique is affirmed: this man is declared to be identical with God because he, the Person, is the “Word who was made flesh and dwelt among us.” “Therefore,” says Barth, “he does not only live through God and with God; he is himself God. Nor is he autonomous and self-existent. His reality, existence and being are wholly and absolutely that of God himself, the God who acts in his Word. His manhood is only the predicate of his Godhead, or better and more concretely, it is only the predicate, assumed in inconceivable condescension, of the Word acting upon us, the Word who is the Lord.”<\/p>\n<p>In other words, Jesus our Lord is, as man, so united with God that he exists as man only and insofar as he exists as God. The doctrine of <em>anhypostasy<\/em> states this truth negatively. It affirms that the human nature of our Lord does not possess the mode of its being as personal in and of itself. The doctrine of <em>enhypostasy<\/em> states this truth positively. It affirms that the particular human nature that is our Lord’s acquires its personal mode of being by union with the personal Son of God. It is not Jesus of Nazareth who becomes the Son of God (adoptionism) but the Son of God who becomes Jesus of Nazareth. The Incarnation is a unique act of a divine Person, not a unique experience of the divine on the part of a human person. The Subject of the Incarnation is a divine Subject who acts, not a human subject who is acted upon. But inasmuch as the divine Subject, the eternal Son, so acts as to become this man, Jesus of Nazareth, this man is—not just symbolizes, but <em>is<\/em>—the Son of God as no other man is or ever can be the Son of God.<\/p>\n<p>The scriptural basis of the doctrine of the Incarnation includes, of course, the entire range of data in the Gospels as well as several passages in the Pauline Epistles, especially Philippians 2:6-8, which is, perhaps, the single most important christological passage in the NT. Here Paul, using the words of a primitive Christian confession, speaks of him “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Chalcedonian Creed does not resolve the mystery of the Incarnation, and theologians have made many efforts to better understand the mystery. One of the best known is based on an inference drawn from the passage quoted above. It is known as <em>kenosis,<\/em> the theory that when the Son became man, he emptied himself of some aspect of his divinity. The text of Philippians does not say that he emptied himself <em>of<\/em> anything, but only that he emptied <em>himself,<\/em> a striking figure of speech denoting condescension (“made himself of no reputation,” <span>kjv<\/span>). In spite of the exegetical difficulties in this statement, kenotic theory has persisted, in one form or another, especially in British theology. Another effort at understanding suggests that our Lord’s humanity was the <em>incognito<\/em> (Kierkegaard’s term) that hid his identity as a divine person from all but the eyes of faith. Thus, the Incarnation was a revelation that veils as well as discloses the truth.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Ascension of Christ; Christ; Incarnation; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven; Messiah; Parable; Son of God; Son of Man; Virgin Birth of Jesus; Word.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHRISTOLOGY* The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of...","summary_en":"CHRISTOLOGY* The study of the person and work of Jesus Christ. The confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, first ventured by Peter at Caesarea Philippi (Mt 16:16), is the heart of the Christian faith. It is this confession that makes one a Christian, and all Christian theology is thinking, in the light of this confession, about the meaning of this confession. The first major theological decision of the church resulting from such believing thought was the affirmation of...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19625,"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":21666,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Keys of the Kingdom","title_en":"Keys of the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>KEYS OF THE KINGDOM<\/h3>\n<p>Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of Jesus give God the key to the abode of the dead. In the book of Revelation, John sees Christ holding the keys of death and hades (Rv 1:18; see 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s Gospel the keys symbolize the authority to open and shut the kingdom of heaven. In response to Peter’s declaration that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:16), Jesus entrusts authority to “bind” and “loose” to Peter (v 19). This authority is later extended to the other disciples (18:18). The words “bind” and “loose” were used by rabbis near the time of Christ to declare someone under a ban (“binding”) and relief of the ban (“loosing”). Sometimes this referred to expulsion or reinstatement at a synagogue. At other times binding and loosing indicated consignment to God’s judgment or acquittal from it. The “power of the keys” (or binding and loosing) of which Jesus speaks is a spiritual authority like that he gave the disciples in John 20:23: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees and scribes assumed that as teachers of the law they had power to shut the kingdom of heaven against others (Mt 23:13). Yet as blind guides they failed to recognize what Peter had acknowledged—that Jesus was the one in whom God’s kingdom had come. The keys of the kingdom authorized the pronouncement of judgment and the promise of forgiveness—not by human authority, but on the basis of Christ’s word.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KEYS OF THE KINGDOM<\/h3>\n<p>Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of Jesus give God the key to the abode of the dead. In the book of Revelation, John sees Christ holding the keys of death and hades (Rv 1:18; see 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s Gospel the keys symbolize the authority to open and shut the kingdom of heaven. In response to Peter’s declaration that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:16), Jesus entrusts authority to “bind” and “loose” to Peter (v 19). This authority is later extended to the other disciples (18:18). The words “bind” and “loose” were used by rabbis near the time of Christ to declare someone under a ban (“binding”) and relief of the ban (“loosing”). Sometimes this referred to expulsion or reinstatement at a synagogue. At other times binding and loosing indicated consignment to God’s judgment or acquittal from it. The “power of the keys” (or binding and loosing) of which Jesus speaks is a spiritual authority like that he gave the disciples in John 20:23: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees and scribes assumed that as teachers of the law they had power to shut the kingdom of heaven against others (Mt 23:13). Yet as blind guides they failed to recognize what Peter had acknowledged—that Jesus was the one in whom God’s kingdom had come. The keys of the kingdom authorized the pronouncement of judgment and the promise of forgiveness—not by human authority, but on the basis of Christ’s word.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KEYS OF THE KINGDOM Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (rsv). Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of J...","summary_en":"KEYS OF THE KINGDOM Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (rsv). Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of J...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24804,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25450,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35795,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of God","title_en":"Son of God","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTermintheOldTestament\">The Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheGospels\">In the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\n<p>The first is his <em>eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\n<p>Long before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Of all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pros<\/span> (short for <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prosopon pros prosopon<\/span><em>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\n<p>After the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his <em>nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The third aspect is his <em>messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestamentEpistles\">In the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asclepius”; and eventually by ascribing to anyone with mysterious powers or qualities the title or reputation of “divine man.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTermintheOldTestament\">The Term in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, certain men who lived before the time of Noah (Gn 6:1-4), “the angels” (including Satan, Jb 1:6; 2:1), and other heavenly beings (Pss 29:1; 82:6; 89:6, <span>rsv<\/span> mg) are called “sons of God.” Israel as a people was the chosen son of God. This corporate sonship became the basis of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: “Israel is my first-born son” (Ex 4:22; cf. Jer 31:9). Corporate sonship was the context for focus on personal sonship in the divine sanction of David as king: “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sm 7:14). David’s “adoptive” sonship was by divine decree: “I will proclaim the decree: . . . ‘You are my son; today I have become your Father’ ” (Ps 2:7); and it was the prophetic prototype of the “essential” sonship of Jesus, David’s royal son (Mt 3:17; Mk 1:11; Lk 3:22; Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5). Other messianic prophecies ascribe divine names to the Davidic Messiah: “Immanuel” (Is 7:13-14) and “Mighty God, Everlasting Father” (Is 9:6-7). These are fulfilled in Jesus (Mt 1:23; 21:4-10; 22:41-45).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheGospels\">In the Gospels<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ identity as the Son of God is revealed in the Gospels in three distinct ways.<\/p>\n<p>The first is his <em>eternal, personal sonship.<\/em> Jesus’ personal sonship is revealed in Peter’s confession, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) and in Jesus’ identification of himself at his trial: “ ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ . . . ‘I am,’ said Jesus” (Mk 14:61-62). In both instances, the issue is his personal being or essence, his eternal identity.<\/p>\n<p>Long before Creation, even from eternity, the Father and the Son enjoyed fellowship with each other. We know this because the Bible tells us so—but not in any great detail. For the most part, the Scriptures are silent about the premundane scene. And yet there are a few verses that lift the veil slightly and give us a glimpse into that sublime, divine relationship that always existed between the Father and the Son.<\/p>\n<p>Of all the books in the Bible, the Gospel of John has the most to say about the relationship between the Father and the Son. It is from John’s inspired pen that we read from the outset, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This is a rather flat rendering. The Greek conveys something more picturesque: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was face to face with God, and the Word was himself God.” Imagine, the Word, who was the preincarnate Son of God, was face to face with God. The expression “face to face” translates the Greek preposition <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pros<\/span> (short for <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">prosopon pros prosopon<\/span><em>,<\/em> “face to face,” a common expression in koine Greek.) The expression signifies intimate fellowship. The Father and Son enjoyed such an intimate fellowship from eternity. How they must have delighted in each other!<\/p>\n<p>After the Son of God became a man and began his ministry on earth, he referred to the relationship he enjoyed with the Father before the foundation of the world. Jesus spoke of what he had seen and heard together with the Father before coming to earth (see John 3:13 and 8:38). Jesus longed to return to that glorious sphere. In his prayer before going to the cross (in ch 17), he asked the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world was (v 5). Jesus wanted to recapture his primordial equality with the Father—something he had willingly relinquished for the sake of his Father’s plan (see Phil 2:6-7). As he prayed to the Father, a wonderful utterance escaped from his lips: “Father, . . . you loved me before the foundation of the world” (Jn 17:24). God’s Son, the unique Son, was the single object of the Father’s love.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ sonship is his <em>nativity sonship.<\/em> The nativity of Jesus is traced to the direct, spiritual paternity of God. Jesus is the Son of God because his incarnation and birth into the human race was created by the Holy Spirit. In Matthew, Jesus’ conception “is of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:20). He is to be named “Jesus” (meaning Yahweh is salvation) “because he will save his people from their sins” (v 21), and “Immanuel” (God with us) because he is himself the Son of God in human flesh (v 23). In Luke, Jesus’ conception was by the Holy Spirit and the power of the Most High (Lk 1:31, 35), so Jesus was called “the Son of God” (v 35). If the father of Jesus had been the man Joseph, he would have been called “Jesus, the son of Joseph.” Luke’s teaching clearly means that since the Spirit of God was the father of Jesus, this son of the virgin Mary is properly called “Jesus, the Son of God.”<\/p>\n<p>The third aspect is his <em>messianic sonship.<\/em> Jesus is the Father’s Son and representative, whose earthly mission is to establish the kingdom of God. At his baptism, he began his mission with the Father’s coronation: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased” (Mt 3:17; cf. Ps 2:7). Jesus received a similar pronouncement from heaven at his Transfiguration (Lk 9:35). As the messianic Son, Jesus perfectly completed the redeeming work given him to do by his Father.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestamentEpistles\">In the New Testament Epistles<\/p>\n<p>Paul spoke of the essential, ontological sonship of Jesus—not as an isolated fact, but in the context of his redemptive work. It was as God’s Son that Jesus took human nature (Rom 1:3) and as “the Son of God” that he was resurrected and enthroned in power (Mt 28:18; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:28). The Incarnation is spoken of as “God sending his own Son” (Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4) for humanity’s redemption, a redemption that was accomplished “through the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10; 8:29, 32). As a consequence, believers can have “fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor 1:9), and they can live by faith in “the Son of God” (Gal 2:20). Paul’s first preaching was “that Jesus is the Son of God” (Acts 9:20); this was later expounded by Paul in the light of Psalm 2:7 (see Acts 13:33).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrews, Jesus is “the Son,” who is God’s “firstborn” and personal “heir,” who is creator and sustainer of the universe, and who is the “radiance of God’s glory” (Heb 1:2-12; 3:6; 5:5). As the Son, he is the final and eternal High Priest who ascended to heaven and whose mediatorial work remains perfect forever (4:14; 6:6; 7:3, 28). In 1 John 4 and 5, belief in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is essential for salvation; disbelief comes from the spirit of the Antichrist.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","summary_en":"SON OF GOD Term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son. Jesus’ unique sonship is antithetical to concepts of sonship popular in the ancient world. In Hellenism, people believed a man could be a “son of the gods” in many ways: in mythology, by cohabitation of a god with a woman whose offspring was imagined to be superhuman; in politics, by giving generals and emperors high honors in the cult of Roman emperor worship; in medicine, by calling a doctor “son of Asc...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35858,"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":54815,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","summary_en":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82441,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","summary_en":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110067,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","summary_en":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137693,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:16<\/strong> Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as <em>the Messiah, the Son of the living God<\/em> (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","summary_en":"16:16 Peter’s acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God (3:17) shows that his eyes had been opened by faith (see 11:25-27; 14:33; 27:54).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61922,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom","title_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","summary_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65423,"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":89548,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom","title_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","summary_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93049,"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":117174,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom","title_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","summary_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120675,"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":144800,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom","title_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Promised Kingdom<\/h3>\n<p>God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to keep the hope of God’s kingdom alive. The Chronicler wanted the people to know that God’s promise to David, confirmed to Solomon, was equally confirmed for them. After the Exile, Judah no longer existed as an independent kingdom ruled by the dynasty of David. Instead, Judea stood as a small territory with limited independence under a Persian governor. Yet the community of Judea could experience God’s blessing, just as the people had in the days of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Chronicler did not know exactly how God’s promise to David would be realized. Yet he had complete trust in God’s power, sovereignty, and justice; he knew that God would be faithful to his promise and that his kingdom would eventually rule over all.<\/p>\n<p>Following the time of the Chronicler, it appeared that his hopes were disappointed. The Greeks replaced the Persians as rulers of Israel; their intolerance for the Jewish community of faith reached its zenith in the tyrannical Antiochus IV “Epiphanes” (175–163 <span>BC<\/span>), who made every effort to destroy Israel’s faith and identity, as Daniel had foreseen (Dan 11:21-39). The priestly family of Maccabees resisted Antiochus, restored the Temple, and preserved Judea’s identity. But then the community disintegrated under the successors to the Maccabees; Israel fractured into sects (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes) and eventually came under Roman control. When Jesus was born, Roman governors controlled the territory of Israel.<\/p>\n<p>The fulfillment of God’s promises to David took place in a way the Chronicler did not anticipate. Jesus was the anointed king, the Messiah from the dynasty of David (see Matt 16:16-17). His Kingdom was not established by the military defeat of the Romans but rather by the defeat of the powers of sin and death. His Kingdom continues to spread through his followers, and the powers of hell will never prevail against it. In the end, His Kingdom will be fully realized in the ultimate defeat of the powers of evil, and He will reign as King forever (see Rev 19:11–20:15).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Chr 17:9-14; 28:1-21; Isa 2:1-4; 60:1-22; 65:17-25; Ezek 37:21-28; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Mic 4:1-5; Zech 9:9-10; 14:1-21; Matt 4:17; 6:33; 13:11-50; 16:16-19; 18:3-4, 23-35; 19:14, 23-30; 20:1-16; 22:2-14; 25:1-46; Luke 1:30-33; Eph 5:5; Rev 19:1–21:27<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","summary_en":"God’s Promised Kingdom God promised that his kingdom would come through David (1 Chr 17:4-14). During his reign, David himself made preparations for the building of the Temple as the focal point of God’s kingdom (28:11-19). He also appealed to Israel’s leaders to seek the Lord (28:8-10), and he encouraged the community of Israel to “be strong and courageous” in trusting God to provide (28:20-21). The Chronicler used these words of David to appeal to the citizens of Judea after the Exile to ke...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148301,"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}],"17":[{"id":42094,"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":69720,"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":97346,"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":124972,"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":1591,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Andrew, the Apostle","title_en":"Andrew, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANDREW, T<span>he<\/span> A<span>postle<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came into prominence. Whenever the relationship of the two is mentioned, Andrew is always described as the brother of Simon Peter and never the other way around (Mt 4:18; Mk 1:16; Jn 1:40; 6:8), although Andrew is also mentioned without reference to his relationship to Peter (Mk 1:29; 3:18; 13:3; Jn 12:22). Andrew’s father was John (Mt 16:17; Jn 1:42; 21:15-17), and his hometown was Bethsaida (Jn 1:44), a village on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee.<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John mentions disciples being with Jesus (2:2; 4:2), and it is likely that Andrew was one of that early group. Evidently, however, he returned to his activity as a fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, where he shared a house with Peter and his family in Capernaum (Mt 4:18-20; Mk 1:16-18, 29-33). While they were fishing, Andrew and Peter received a definite call to follow Jesus and become those who fish for people. From among the disciples of Jesus a group of 12 were later specially chosen as apostles. Andrew is always listed among the first four named, along with Peter and two other brothers, John and James (Mt 10:2-4; Lk 6:13-16; Acts 1:13).<\/p>\n<p>Andrew is named in only three other contexts in the Gospels. At the feeding of the 5,000 he called attention to the boy who had five barley loaves and two fish (Jn 6:8-9). When certain Greeks came to Philip, asking to see Jesus, Philip told Andrew and then the two of them told Jesus (Jn 12:20-22). Finally, Andrew is listed among those who were questioning Jesus privately on the Mt of Olives (Mk 13:3-4). The last NT mention of Andrew is in the list of apostles waiting in the upper room in Jerusalem for the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:12-14).<\/p>\n<p>Various documents associated with Andrew, such as the Acts of Andrew mentioned by the early church historian Eusebius, are of doubtful value. Some traditions indicate that Andrew ministered in Scythia. According to the Muratorian Canon, Andrew received a revelation at night that the apostle John should write the fourth Gospel. Tradition is rather uniform that Andrew died at Patrae in Achaia. A story developed that he was martyred on an X-shaped cross (a “decussate” or “saltire” cross), which has become known as St Andrew’s Cross. Another tradition is that an arm of the dead Andrew was taken into Scotland as a relic by Regulus, and thus Andrew became known as a patron saint of Scotland. On the calendar of saints of the Roman and Greek churches, Andrew’s date is set as November 30. <em>See<\/em> Apocrypha (Specific Titles of Apocryphal Writings): Andrew, Acts of; Andrew, Story of; Andrew and Matthias, Acts of; Andrew and Paul, Acts of.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Apostle, Apostleship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","summary_en":"ANDREW, The Apostle One of Christ’s 12 apostles. Andrew first appears in the NT as a disciple of John the Baptist (Jn 1:35, 40). After hearing John say, “Look, there is the Lamb of God!” (Jn 1:36), referring to Jesus, Andrew and another unnamed disciple followed Jesus and stayed with him for a day (Jn 1:36-39). Andrew then told his brother, Simon Peter, that he had found the Messiah and brought Peter to Jesus (Jn 1:40-42). From then on Andrew faded into the background, and his brother came in...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":3816,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Bar-Jona*","title_en":"Bar-Jona*","content_ro":"<h3>BAR-JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (<span>kjv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BAR-JONA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (<span>kjv<\/span>). <em>See<\/em> Simon Peter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BAR-JONA* Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (kjv). See Simon Peter.","summary_en":"BAR-JONA* Aramaic form of Simon Peter’s surname, meaning “son of Jonah” (Mt 16:17). Another variant of the name appears in John 1:42 and 21:15-17, where the best Greek texts have “son of John” rather than “son of Jona[s]” (kjv). See Simon Peter.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4227,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ben (Noun)","title_en":"Ben (Noun)","content_ro":"<h3>BEN (N<span>oun<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew word often used as a prefix to describe a relationship. Literally meaning “son,” it is found some 4,850 times in the OT. The Aramaic equivalent is <em>bar<\/em> (see Mt 16:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bar.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BEN (N<span>oun<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew word often used as a prefix to describe a relationship. Literally meaning “son,” it is found some 4,850 times in the OT. The Aramaic equivalent is <em>bar<\/em> (see Mt 16:17).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bar.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BEN (Noun) Hebrew word often used as a prefix to describe a relationship. Literally meaning “son,” it is found some 4,850 times in the OT. The Aramaic equivalent is bar (see Mt 16:17). See also Bar.","summary_en":"BEN (Noun) Hebrew word often used as a prefix to describe a relationship. Literally meaning “son,” it is found some 4,850 times in the OT. The Aramaic equivalent is bar (see Mt 16:17). See also Bar.","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":5238,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blood","title_en":"Blood","content_ro":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLOOD<\/h3>\n<p>Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, <span>nlt<\/span>). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also 1 Cor 15:50; Gal 1:16; Eph 6:12). After betraying Jesus, Judas recognized that he had “sinned in betraying innocent blood” (Mt 27:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). In such passages “blood” has reference to life lived at the human level, natural life as opposed to spiritual or divine life.<\/p>\n<p>The term “blood” is also used in the sense of shedding blood, that is, in killing or murder. Psalm 9:12 speaks of one “who avenges blood.” Genesis 37:26 refers to the brothers who concealed Joseph’s blood, that is, his murder. To be “burdened with the blood of another” (Prv 28:17, <span>rsv<\/span>) means to be guilty of murder. At the crucifixion Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this man” (Mt 27:24-25). Thus, the idea of violent death is regularly connected with blood.<\/p>\n<p>The logic of such expressions becomes particularly clear when one sees how closely life is associated with blood. Three passages specifically tie the two together. “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood” (Gn 9:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lv 17:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). “The only restriction is never to eat the blood, for the blood is the life” (Dt 12:23, <span>tlb<\/span>). Because God is the author of all life, any shedding of blood (any killing) is a serious matter. A certain sanctity associated with blood forms the basis for prohibitions against eating it. (Compare what the apostles said in Acts 15:20.) Blood stands for the “life principle” that is from God.<\/p>\n<p>Because of its association with life, blood takes on a special significance in the sacrificial motif. On the Day of Atonement (Lv 16), the blood of a bull and of a goat was sprinkled upon the altar as a “covering” of the people’s sin. Life was poured out in death. Animal life was given up on behalf of the life of the people. Judgment and atonement were carried out through a transfer of the sin of the people to the animal sacrifice. Transference is depicted also by the scapegoat in the same ceremony (Lv 16:20-22). In the first Passover (Ex 12:1-13), the blood bore the same meaning. Animal blood posted on each door was a sign that a death had already taken place, so the angel of death passed over.<\/p>\n<p>Further, because life is connected with blood, blood becomes the supreme offering to God. In the ratification of the covenant (Ex 24), Moses poured half the sacrificial blood on the altar; after reading the covenant to the people and receiving their affirmative response, he sprinkled the rest of the blood on them and said, “This blood confirms the covenant the <span>Lord<\/span> has made with you in giving you these laws” (Ex 24:8, <span>nlt<\/span>). Sprinkling blood on both the altar and the people bound God and the Israelites together in covenant relationship. In the sacrifices of Israel, blood stood for death and depending on the context, might also stand for judgment, sacrifice, substitution, or redemption. Life with God was made possible by blood.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, apart from medical references (e.g., Mt 9:20) and references to murder (e.g., Acts 22:20), the primary reference is to the blood of Christ, an allusion to the OT motifs. The synoptic Gospels show that at the Last Supper Jesus spoke of his blood with reference to a new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20). The language surrounding those sayings reveals the sacrificial motif; Jesus was speaking of his death and its redemptive significance. The fourth Gospel expresses the same theology in different terms and in a different context: “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you cannot have eternal life within you” (Jn 6:53, <span>nlt<\/span>). The believer is said to participate by faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord (see also 1 Cor 10:16).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul’s letters likewise associate blood with Christ’s death, so much so that the word becomes—like the term “cross”—synonymous with the death of Christ in its saving significance: making peace “by means of his blood on the cross” (Col 1:20, <span>nlt<\/span>); and in a passage on reconciliation: “though you once were far away from God, now you have been brought near to him because of the blood of Christ” (Eph 2:13, <span>nlt<\/span>). “Blood” and “cross” both stand for the death of Jesus in reconciling Jew and Gentile to God and in the creation of a new humanity. Paul evidently had in mind the sacrifice of the Day of Atonement when he said that God purposed that Christ be an atoning sacrifice by his blood (Rom 3:25). His vocabulary (from Lv 16) focused on the most important sacrifice of Jewish tradition.<\/p>\n<p>Peter made reference to the blood of the covenant (Ex 24) when he described Christian exiles as having been sprinkled with the blood of Christ (1 Pt 1:2). He reminded his readers that they had been redeemed by that blood (v 19). In calling Christ the “spotless lamb of God,” he may have had in mind either the servant of Isaiah 53 or the Passover lamb, both of which had redemptive significance in his readers’ minds. Finally, to the writer of Hebrews the whole OT system of sacrifices found its ultimate fulfillment in the blood of Christ, that is, in his sacrificial death (Heb 9:7-28; 13:11-12).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, NT references to the blood of Christ point to the culminating and comprehensive redemption achieved by God in the death of his Son (Heb 10:20). Both justice and justification were thus achieved (Rom 3:26). The blood of Christ is therefore called the “once for all” means of redemption (Heb 9:26). <em>See<\/em> Atonement; Offerings and Sacrifices.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","summary_en":"BLOOD Fluid that circulates through the body of a person or a vertebrate animal. Aside from reference to the common physical substance, the term “blood” has a number of metaphorical uses in the Bible. At times, it refers to a red color: “the sun will be turned into darkness, and the moon will turn bloodred” (Acts 2:20, nlt). The “blood of the grape” means wine (Dt 32:14, rsv). In the NT the expression “flesh and blood” refers to human life, to “natural” humanity: “Flesh and blood has not reve...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12419,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Flesh","title_en":"Flesh","content_ro":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FLESH<\/h3>\n<p>The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, <span>kjv<\/span>). This idea leads to the union of two different persons, man and wife as “one flesh” (Gn 2:24), and a man can say of his relatives, “I am your bone and your flesh” (Jgs 9:2). The idea of flesh as the whole person leads to the expression “all flesh,” denoting the totality of humankind, sometimes including also the animal world.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the most distinctive use of “flesh” in the OT is found in those passages where it designates human weakness and frailty over against God. “My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh” (Gn 6:3, <span>rsv<\/span>). In Psalm 78:39, God attributes sin to the fact that men are but flesh. In 2 Chronicles 32:8 the arm of flesh of the king of Assyria (i.e., his weakness) is contrasted with the all-powerful God. The one who puts trust in God need not fear what “flesh” can do (Ps 56:4), but the one who puts trust in human flesh instead of in God is under a curse (Jer 17:5). In Isaiah 31:3 flesh is contrasted with spirit, as weakness is with strength.<\/p>\n<p>However, nowhere in the OT is flesh viewed as sinful. Flesh is conceived as being created by God of the dust of the earth (Gn 2:7), and as God’s creation, it is good.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Paul ascribes many—often unique—definitions to the word “flesh” (Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">sarx<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Stuff of the Body<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” is frequently used to describe the tissues that constitute the body. There are different kinds of flesh—“of men,” “of animals,” “of birds,” “of fish” (1 Cor 15:39). Pain and suffering may be experienced in the flesh (2 Cor 12:7). Circumcision is done in the flesh (Rom 2:28). While “flesh” in such references is not sinful, it is corruptible and cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor 15:50). Jesus’ body was also a body of flesh (Col 1:22).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as the Body Itself<\/h5>\n<p>By a natural transition, the part is used for the whole, and in many places “flesh” is synonymous with the body as a whole rather than designating the fleshy part of the body. Paul may thus speak either of being absent in the body (1 Cor 5:3) or in the flesh (Col 2:5). Paul can say that the life of Jesus may be manifested in our body or in our mortal flesh (2 Cor 4:10-11). “He who joins himself to a prostitute becomes one body with her. For, as it is written, ‘The two shall become one flesh’ ” (1 Cor 6:16, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Person with Reference to Origin<\/h5>\n<p>Following OT usage, “flesh” was used by Paul to refer not merely to the stuff of the body or to the body itself, but concretely to the person as constituted by flesh. In this usage the word may refer to the person’s human relationship, the physical origin and the natural ties that bind one to other humans. Paul speaks of his kinsmen “according to the flesh,” his fellow Jews (Rom 9:3, <span>kjv<\/span>), and even uses “my flesh” (11:14, <span>kjv<\/span>) as a synonym for these kinsmen. The “children of the flesh” (9:8) are those born by natural generation in contrast to those born as a result of divine intervention. Christ was descended from David according to the flesh (1:3). The phrase does not designate the source merely of his bodily life but of his entire human existence, including both his body and his human spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence<\/h5>\n<p>Another use of “flesh” simply designates human existence. As long as a person lives in the body, that one is “in the flesh.” Thus, Paul can speak of the life that he lives “in the flesh” as lived by faith in the Son of God (Gal 2:20, <span>rsv<\/span>). Referring to Jesus’ earthly ministry, Paul says that he abolished “in the flesh” the enmity between Jew and Gentile (Eph 2:15). Peter has the same meaning when he speaks of Jesus having been put to death “in the flesh” (1 Pt 3:18). So also John: “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (1 Jn 4:2). This usage is reflected most notably in the Johannine saying “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14).<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Human Existence in Terms of Outward Presentation<\/h5>\n<p>“Flesh” also extends beyond humans in their bodily life to include other factors crucial to human existence. Thus, “confidence in the flesh” (Phil 3:3, <span>rsv<\/span>) does not mean confidence in the body but confidence in the whole complex of the outward realm of human existence. It includes Paul’s Jewish ancestry, his strict religious training, his zeal, and his prominence in Jewish religious circles. The phrase to “glory after the flesh” (2 Cor 11:18, <span>kjv<\/span>) is rendered “boast about their human achievements” in the <span>nlt<\/span>. A good showing “in the flesh” is practically synonymous with worldly prominence (Gal 6:11-14). The Judaizers insisted upon circumcision to promote a sense of prideful attainment in the religious life so that they might have a ground of glorying. But these external distinctions and grounds for glorying no longer appealed to Paul, because the world had been crucified to him and he to the world.<\/p>\n<p>“Flesh” is also used of outward relationships, as when describing the social ties existing between slave and master (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; Phlm 1:16). “In the flesh” also describes the realm of marital relationships, which entails certain troublesome problems (1 Cor 7:28).<\/p>\n<p>This usage illuminates an otherwise difficult saying, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more” (2 Cor 5:16, <span>kjv<\/span>). The <span>rsv<\/span> correctly renders the phrase “from a human point of view.” The verse does not mean that Paul had heard and seen Jesus in Jerusalem at some previous time and had gained some acquaintance with Christ “after the flesh.” “After the flesh” modifies the verb “to know,” not the noun “Christ.” Before his conversion, Paul knew all people “after the flesh”; that is, he judged them by worldly, human standards. To know Christ “after the flesh” means to look at him through merely human eyes. As a Jew, Paul had felt that Jesus was a deluded messianic pretender. According to the Jewish understanding, the Messiah was to reign over the earth as a Davidic king, save his people Israel, and punish the hated Gentiles. But Paul surrendered this false human view and came to know Christ as he really is—the incarnate Son of God, the Savior of all who believe. As a Christian, Paul no longer judged others according to the flesh.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Fallen Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>When Paul says that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50, <span>rsv<\/span>), he does not mean that humans cannot inherit the kingdom of God but rather that human fallenness cannot; as the next clause shows, “neither does corruption inherit incorruption.” The weak, fallen, corruptible body cannot inherit the kingdom of God; there must be a change; the “corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality” (1 Cor 15:53, <span>kjv<\/span>). This is not the salvation of the soul or spirit but the exchange of one kind of body for another that is suited to the final glorious kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>When Peter confessed the messiahship of Jesus, Jesus replied, “Flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven” (Mt 16:17, <span>rsv<\/span>). The meaning of this verse is obvious. This knowledge of Jesus’ messiahship was not a human deduction; it could be achieved only by divine revelation.<\/p>\n<h5>Flesh as Sinful Humanity<\/h5>\n<p>There remains a group of ethical references that are distinctly Pauline. The most important feature of this usage is that man is seen not only as fallen and weak before God, but as fallen and sinful. Flesh is contrasted with human spirit regenerated by the divine Spirit, and without the aid of the Spirit, one cannot please God. The most vivid passage is the first part of Romans 8, where Paul sharply contrasts those who are “in the flesh” with those who are “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” in this sense does not mean to be in a state of ecstasy but to be living one’s life in that spiritual realm that is controlled by the Spirit of God. Those who are “in the flesh,” that is, unregenerate, cannot please God. There are two contrasting and mutually exclusive realms: “in the flesh” and “in the Spirit.” To be “in the Spirit” means to be indwelt by God’s Holy Spirit, that is, to be a regenerate person.<\/p>\n<p>In Romans 7–8 Paul makes it clear that the unregenerate person cannot please God by loving and serving him as God requires. Thus, the Law was unable to make mankind truly righteous, because the flesh is weak (8:2). To live after the flesh is death; to live after the Spirit is life (8:6). Elsewhere Paul says, “For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing” (7:18, <span>kjv<\/span>). Flesh here cannot be the physical flesh, for the body of flesh is the temple of the Spirit (1 Cor 6:19) and a member of Christ (6:15) and is to be the means of glorifying God (6:20). Paul, therefore, means that in his unregenerate nature there dwells none of the goodness that God demands.<\/p>\n<p>While Paul makes a sharp and absolute contrast between being “in the flesh” (unregenerate) and “in the Spirit” (regenerate), when one becomes regenerate and comes to be “in the Spirit,” that person is no longer in the flesh, but the flesh is still in him. In fact, there remains in the believer a struggle between the flesh and the Spirit. Writing to people who are “in the Spirit,” Paul says, “For the flesh lusteth [strives] against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would” (Gal 5:17, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because the Christian life is the battleground of these two opposing principles, it is impossible to be the perfect person that one would wish to be.<\/p>\n<p>The same situation is reflected in 1 Corinthians 2:14–3:3 where Paul describes three classes of people: the “natural” (2:14, <span>kjv<\/span>); the “carnal,” that is, fleshly man (3:1, 3, <span>kjv<\/span>); and the “spiritual man” (3:1, <span>kjv<\/span>). The “natural man” is unregenerate. Those who are “in the flesh” (Rom 8:9) have devoted the whole of their life to the human level and hence are unable to know the things of God. “Spiritual man” refers to those whose life is ruled by the Spirit of God, so that the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) are evident in their life. Between these two there is a third class—those who are “fleshly” yet who are babes in Christ. Therefore, they must be “in the Spirit,” yet they do not walk “according to the Spirit.” Because they are “babes in Christ,” the Spirit of God dwells in them, yet the Holy Spirit is not allowed to have full control over them, and they are still walking “like men” (1 Cor 3:3), manifesting the works of the flesh in jealousy and strife.<\/p>\n<h5>Works of the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>In Galatians 5:19-23 Paul contrasts the life in the flesh and the life in the Spirit: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (Gal 5:19-21, <span>kjv<\/span>). The important thing to note about this list is that while some of these are sins of bodily and sexual appetite, others are religious sins—idolatry, witchcraft—and several are sins “of the spirit,” that is, of the disposition—hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife. The words “seditions” and “heresies” refer not to theological heresies but to a factious, divisive spirit. This proves conclusively that for Paul the “flesh” is not synonymous with the body but includes the whole person, with all the inner attitudes and disposition.<\/p>\n<h5>Victory over the Flesh<\/h5>\n<p>While a struggle remains in the Christian between the Spirit and the flesh, Paul knows of a way of victory for the Spirit. The flesh of the body comes within the sphere of sanctification (1 Thes 5:23), but the flesh as the unregenerate human nature can only be put to death.<\/p>\n<p>This is called the tension between the objective and the subjective. Because certain things have happened in Christ (objective), certain inevitable results should accrue (subjective). In Paul’s view, the flesh has already been put to death in the death of Christ. Those who belong to Christ have already crucified the flesh with its passions and desires (Gal 5:24). Paul elsewhere says, “I have been crucified with Christ” (2:20) and “our old self was crucified with him” (Rom 6:6). Such references make it clear that “flesh” and the “self” are in some ways to be identified. This identity is further supported in the teaching about crucifixion, for Paul means the same thing by the crucifixion of the flesh that he means when he says, “How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? We were baptized into his death. We are buried with him by baptism into death” (vv 1-4). It is I myself who have died with Christ.<\/p>\n<p>This crucifixion and death of the flesh does not, however, work automatically. It is an event that must be appropriated by faith. This involves two aspects. First, believers are to recognize that the flesh has been crucified with Christ. “Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom 6:11, <span>kjv<\/span>). One cannot consider the self dead with Christ to sin unless that person has actually died and been crucified with Christ, but because this has already happened at the moment of saving faith, it can be put into daily practice. Those who have died with Christ are to “mortify [put to death] the deeds of the body” (8:13, <span>kjv<\/span>). “Body” is here used as a vehicle for the works of the “flesh”—the sensual life of the unregenerate nature. Those who have been brought from death into life are to yield their members to God as instruments of righteousness (6:13). One who has died with Christ is to “mortify” (<span>kjv<\/span>), that is, put to death what is earthly—fornication, uncleanness, covetousness (Col 3:5). Having already put off the old nature and put on the new, the believer is to put on compassion, kindness, lowliness and the like.<\/p>\n<p>Victory over the flesh is sometimes described as walking in the Spirit. “Walk by the Spirit, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh” (Gal 5:16, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Rom 8:4). Walking in the Spirit means to live each moment under the control of the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Body; Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","summary_en":"FLESH The body; the physical being of humans; the human person and human existence; the carnal nature of humans. In the Old Testament Term commonly used to designate the material stuff of the body, whether of people (Gn 40:19) or of animals (Lv 6:27). However, “flesh” is used in the OT with a variety of meanings. Sometimes it is used as equivalent for the whole body (Prv 14:30), and the meaning is extended to designate the whole person (“my flesh also shall rest in hope,” Ps 16:9, kjv). This ...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19619,"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":20115,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John (Person)","title_en":"John (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li> 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name.<\/li>\n<li> 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6).<\/li>\n<li> 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a member of the larger group of Jesus’ disciples outside the Twelve (cf. Lk 10:1). Known as “John the elder” (the presbyter), he is often credited with the authorship of 2 and 3 John (2 Jn 1:1; 3 Jn 1:1), although the term “elder” there more likely refers to John the apostle.<\/li>\n<li> 4. The apostle. <em>See<\/em> John, The Apostle.<\/li>\n<li>5. The Baptist. <em>See<\/em> John the Baptist.<\/li>\n<li>6. An early disciple known as John Mark, author of the second Gospel. <em>See<\/em> Mark, John.<\/li>","summary_ro":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","summary_en":"JOHN (Person) 1. Father of Simon Peter and Andrew (Jn 1:40-42; 21:15-17). According to Matthew 16:17, Peter’s father was named Jona (Jonas, Jonah). Either Jona was an alternate form of the name John or, more probably, two independent traditions existed regarding his name. 2. Member of the high priestly family who, along with Annas, Caiaphas, and Alexander, questioned Peter and John after the two apostles had healed a lame man (Acts 4:6). 3. According to the early church bishop Papias, a membe...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29999,"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":35434,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Simon","title_en":"Simon","content_ro":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>SIMON<\/h3>\n<p>Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name:<\/p>\n<p>1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. <em>See<\/em> Peter, The Apostle.<\/p>\n<li>2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. Leper, perhaps cured by Jesus, in whose house at Bethany Jesus and his disciples were eating when a woman poured an alabaster flask of costly ointment on the Lord’s head. Over the disciples’ objections against the waste of what could have been sold to support the poor, Jesus commended the act as a wonderful thing (Mt 26:6-13; Mk 14:3-9). From John 12:1-8 it appears that Simon’s house was also the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, but their relationship to Simon is uncertain.<\/li>\n<li>4. Man of Cyrene, a district of North Africa, whom the Romans forced to carry Jesus’ cross (Mt 27:32; Mk 15:21; Lk 23:26). He was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mk 15:21; cf. Rom 16:13).<\/li>\n<li>5. Apostle of Jesus called a Zealot (Lk 6:15), presumably because of prior association either with the party of political extremists by that name, who adopted terrorism to oppose the Roman occupation of Palestine, or with one of a number of Jewish groups noted for their zeal for the law. In Matthew 10:4 and Mark 3:18 he is designated the “Cananaean” (<span>rsv<\/span>)—from the Aramaic word for “zealot.” He is mentioned again in Acts 1:13 as one of the 11 apostles in Jerusalem after Jesus’ ascension. Otherwise, the NT is silent about him.<\/li>\n<li>6. Pharisee whose treatment of Jesus evoked the parable of the two debtors (Lk 7:36-50). He invited Jesus to eat at his house but withheld courtesies customary for guests and disapproved of Jesus’ acceptance of a “sinner” woman who wet the Lord’s feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and anointed them with ointment from an alabaster flask. Jesus’ parable contrasted the woman’s act of loving and repentant faith with Simon’s unloving and self-righteous skepticism.<\/li>\n<li>7. Father of Judas Iscariot, the disciple who betrayed Jesus in Gethsemane (Jn 6:71; 13:2, 26).<\/li>\n<li>8. Magician (often called Simon Magus) of great repute in Samaria. Impressed by the signs and miracles performed by Philip the deacon-become-evangelist, he joined the crowd of baptized believers. He offered Peter and John money in exchange for the gift of the Holy Spirit, provoking Peter’s emphatic rebuke (Acts 8:9-24). From the association of this incident with his name, the English word “simony” is derived; it denotes the sale or purchase of church positions, or any profiteering from sacred things.<\/li>\n<li>9. Tanner of Joppa. Peter lodged at his house for many days (Acts 9:43; 10:6, 17, 32). On Simon’s housetop, Peter experienced the vision of a great sheet let down from heaven, containing animals and birds prohibited as food in Jewish law (10:15). Peter later recognized this vision as his preparation for consenting to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (vv 28-29).<\/li>","summary_ro":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","summary_en":"SIMON Greek form of a Hebrew\/Aramaic name meaning “God has heard.” Nine men in the NT had this name: 1. Son of Jona (Mt 16:17) or John (Jn 1:42), Andrew’s brother (v 40), and surnamed Cephas and Peter (respectively Aramaic and Greek, for “rock,” v 42) by Jesus. A fisherman of Bethsaida (Mk 1:16; Jn 1:44), he became an apostle of Jesus and author of two NT letters bearing his name. See Peter, The Apostle. 2. Brother of Jesus, named with other brothers, James, Joses or Joseph, and Judas (Mt 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54816,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","summary_en":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82442,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","summary_en":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110068,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","summary_en":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137694,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:17<\/strong> God <em>revealed<\/em> to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","summary_en":"16:17 God revealed to Peter his plan of salvation in Jesus, the Messiah. This moment of revelation was a high point in the unfolding of God’s will for humanity (cp. Gal 1:16; 3:23; Eph 3:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60779,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64901,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88405,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92527,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116031,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120153,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143657,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Central Sanctuary","title_en":"The Central Sanctuary","content_ro":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Central Sanctuary<\/h3>\n<p>God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>God is <em>transcendent<\/em> (above all things) and <em>omnipresent<\/em> (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple belonged to him and bore his name, so they were, in a sense, his dwelling places. In the ancient Near East, names were more than labels. They represented the character and nature of the named individuals (e.g., Jacob, Gen 27:36; Jesus, Matt 1:21; Barnabas, Acts 4:36; Peter, Matt 16:17-19). Thus Solomon could advise, “Choose a good reputation [<em>name<\/em>] over great riches” (Prov 22:1).<\/p>\n<p>God made his home in a sanctuary that bore his name. His glorious presence manifested in fire and cloud during the wilderness wanderings served as a constant reminder that he was at home among his people (Exod 40:34-35); likewise, upon the completion of the Temple, his presence was evidenced (1 Kgs 8:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>God would later come to dwell among his people in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14), thereby eliminating the need for a central sanctuary (see John 4:19-24). And now, because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, all believers are able to house God’s presence (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 25:8-9, 22, 40; 26:30; 33:7-11; 40:34-35; Num 7:1; 11:16; Deut 12:4-7; 31:14-15; 1 Kgs 8:10-11, 27; John 1:14; 2:19-21; Acts 7:44; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19-20; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; Heb 8:2, 5; Rev 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","summary_en":"The Central Sanctuary God wanted worship to be carried out in the place where he had established his name. For Israel, this place was the Tabernacle and later the Temple in Jerusalem. God is transcendent (above all things) and omnipresent (present everywhere), yet he chose a specific place for Israel to worship him. Solomon later asked how the God of heaven could be housed in a human structure (1 Kgs 8:27). The answer is that God’s name stands in his place. The Tabernacle and then the Temple ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147779,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus","title_en":"The Blessings of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Blessings of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for <em>blessed<\/em> as <span class=\"latin\" lang=\"la\">beati<\/span>. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor.<\/p>\n<p>The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and women to follow him as he proclaims the message of the Kingdom to Israel (see also Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46). Those who are blessed have repented in response to the proclamation of the Kingdom (Matt 4:17-22). The Beatitudes are connected with Isa 61:1-3: The Spirit endows, leads to proclamation, and blesses the poor, the humble, and the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>The NLT’s use of “God blesses” conveys the ideas of divine origin and approval (see Matt 25:34), fulfillment (see Matt 11:6; 13:16; 16:17), reversal (see Luke 1:1–2:52; 6:20-26), and the condition of obedience required in order to enjoy the blessings (see Pss 1:1, 3-6; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Prov 8:32; Isa 56:2). The blessings are inaugurated with the Messiah’s coming, with a confident hope that they will be enjoyed eternally and completely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 1:1-3; 106:3; 112:1-2; 119:1-2; Isa 56:1-2; Matt 5:3-12; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; 24:46; 25:34; Luke 6:20-26<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","summary_en":"The Blessings of Jesus The blessings of Jesus are called Beatitudes because the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible) translates the Greek word for blessed as beati. No single word can capture all that Jesus is communicating with this term here. He is describing the special favor of God toward his people, both physically and spiritually, and the consequences of living within that favor. The Beatitudes describe the lifestyle and character of a follower of Jesus. Jesus calls men and wome...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":42128,"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":42573,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69754,"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":70199,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97380,"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":97825,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125006,"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":125451,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Stephen","title_en":"Stephen","content_ro":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Stephen<\/h3>\n<p>Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did miraculous things (6:8) and proved to be a bold and effective evangelist and defender of the faith (6:9-10). His witness was so powerful, he was soon arrested by the authorities and brought before the high council for interrogation (6:9-12).<\/p>\n<p>When witnesses accused Stephen of speaking against the sacred Temple and the law of Moses (Acts 6:13-14; cp. Mark 13:2; John 2:19; 4:21), he defended himself before the Jewish high council (Acts 7:1-53). He spoke of Israel’s long history of resisting God and his servants—first Moses and now the Prophet whom Moses had predicted (7:51-53). The Jewish authorities, infuriated by Stephen’s bold accusations, dragged him outside the city and stoned him to death (7:54-60). As he died, Stephen prayed that they might be forgiven (7:60).<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s bold witness gave rise to the first wave of persecution of the early Christians (8:1-3). But this persecution resulted in the Good News spreading even wider as the believers fled Jerusalem and proclaimed the message of Jesus everywhere they went (8:4; 11:19-21). Stephen’s martyrdom thus marks the beginning of the spread of the Good News beyond the borders of Judea.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen’s life reminds us of the determined opposition that a faithful Christian witness can provoke. A bold testimony for Christ may be costly (see Rev 2:10, 13), but there is no insuperable barrier to the growth of the church (see Matt 16:18; Acts 8:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Acts 6:5–8:2; 11:19; 22:20<\/p>","summary_ro":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","summary_en":"Stephen Stephen was an exemplary early Christian who, as a result of the boldness of his witness, was arrested and killed by the Jewish authorities. He is known as the first Christian martyr. Stephen was one of seven men chosen to help administer the distribution of food to needy Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6). He was the most prominent of the seven and is singled out as a man “full of faith and the Holy Spirit” (6:5). Manifesting the grace and power of God in an unusual measure, he did...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":6549,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Church","title_en":"Church","content_ro":"<h3>CHURCH<\/h3>\n<p>A group or assembly of persons called together for a particular purpose. The term appears in only two verses in the Gospels (Mt 16:18; 18:17) but frequently in the book of Acts, most of the letters of Paul, as well as most of the remaining NT writings, especially the Revelation of John.<\/p>\n<p>One way of referring to the body of Israel in the OT was simply “the congregation.” Groups claiming to be the true Israel spiritually rather then naturally called themselves “the congregation.” The term was used by the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as by early Christians; it is the actual meaning of the word “church.” Christians often referred to themselves simply as the church or the congregation (with “of God” being understood). The term could be applied either to all believers in the world or to any local group of them. It meant the total presence of God’s people in a given location. That is why the NT often uses the singular “church” even when many groups of believers are included together (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 1:1); the term “churches” is rarely found (Acts 15:41; 16:5). Each group or the whole group was the place where God was present (Mt 16:18; 18:17); God had purchased the congregation with the blood of his Son (Acts 20:28). The use of the word “church” in the NT is also somewhat dependent upon the Greek world. In the Greek world the word translated “church” designated an <em>assembly<\/em> of people, a meeting, such as a regularly summoned political body, or simply a <em>gathering<\/em> of people. The word is used in such a secular way in Acts 19:32, 39, 41.<\/p>\n<p>The specifically Christian usages of this concept vary considerably in the NT. (1) In analogy to the OT, it sometimes refers to a church meeting, as when Paul says to the Christians in Corinth: “When you meet as a church . . .” (1 Cor 11:18). This means that Christians are the people of God especially when they are gathered for worship. (2) In texts such as Matthew 18:17, Acts 5:11, 1 Corinthians 4:17, and Philippians 4:15, “church” refers to the entire group of Christians living in one place. Often, the local character of a Christian congregation is emphasized, as in the phrases, “the church in Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1), “in Corinth” (1 Cor 1:2), “in Thessalonica” (1 Thes 1:1). (3) In other texts, house assemblies of Christians are called churches, such as those who met in the house of Priscilla and Aquila (Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19). (4) Throughout the NT, “the church” designates the universal church, to which all believers belong (see Acts 9:31; 1 Cor 6:4; Eph 1:22; Col 1:18). Jesus’ first word about the founding of the Christian movement in Matthew 16:18 has this larger meaning: “I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The church, both as a universal reality and in its local, concrete expression, is more specifically designated in Paul’s writings as “the church of God” (e.g., 1 Cor 1:2; 10:32) or “the churches of Christ” (Rom 16:16). In this way a common, secular Greek term receives its distinctive Christian meaning and sets the Christian assembly\/ gathering\/community apart from all other secular or religious groups.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear from the NT as a whole that the Christian community understood itself as the community of the end time, as the community called into being by God’s end-time act of revelation and divine presence in Jesus of Nazareth. So Paul tells the Christians in Corinth that they are those “upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is, God had visited his creation, had called out of both Judaism and the gentile world a new people, empowered by his Spirit to be present in the world, sharing the Good News (gospel) of his radical, unconditional love for his creation (Eph 2:11-22). The Gospels tell us that Jesus chose 12 disciples who became the foundation of this new people. The correspondence to the 12 tribes of Israel is clear, and it shows that the church was understood both as grounded in Judaism and as the fulfillment of God’s intention in calling Israel to become “a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth” (Is 49:6, <span>rsv<\/span>; Rom 11:1-5). It is this recognition that allows Paul to call this new Gentile-Jewish community, this new creation, “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:15-16). In this new community the traditional barriers of race, social standing, and sex—barriers that divided people from one another and categorized them into inferior and superior classes—are seen to be shattered: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28, <span>niv<\/span>). This one entity is called “the body of Christ.”<\/p>\n<p>Paul is alone among NT writers in speaking of the church as Christ’s body (Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 12:27; Eph 1:22-23; 4:12; see also 1 Cor 10:16-17; 12:12-13), or as “the body” of which Christ is the “head” (Eph 4:15; Col 1:18). The origin of this way of speaking about the church is not clear. Among a number of suggestions, two are particularly revealing about Paul’s thought: (1) The Damascus road experience. According to the accounts in Acts (9:3-7; 22:6-11; 26:12-18), Jesus identifies himself with his persecuted disciples. By persecuting these early Christians, Paul was actually fighting against Christ himself. It is possible that later reflection on this experience led Paul to the conviction that the living Christ was so identified with his community that it could be spoken of as his “body,” that is, the concrete expression of his real presence. (2) The Hebrew concept of corporate solidarity. Paul was a Hebrew of the Hebrews (Phil 3:5), and his thinking was thoroughly Jewish. In that context, the individual is largely thought of as intimately tied into the nation as a whole; the individual does not have real existence apart from the whole people. At the same time, the entire people can be seen as represented by one individual. Thus, “Israel” is both the name of one individual and the name of a whole people. The “servant” of Isaiah 42–53 can be both an individual (Is 42:1-4) and the nation of Israel (49:1-6). This idea of corporate solidarity (or personality) is the background for the intimate connection Paul makes between “the first Adam” and sinful humanity as well as between “the last (or second) Adam” (Christ) and renewed humanity (1 Cor 15:45-49; see also Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p>The reality of the intimate relation between Christ and his church is thus expressed by Paul as the organic unity and integration of the physical body (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-27). For Paul, the Lord’s Supper is a specific manifestation of this reality: “The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor 10:16b-17, <span>rsv<\/span>). Since this is the case, Paul goes on to argue, all the functions of the body have their legitimate and rightful place. Division within the body (i.e., the church) reveals that there is something unhealthy within. It is this image of the church as the “body of Christ” that lies behind Paul’s repeated call for and insistence upon unity within the Christian community.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CHURCH<\/h3>\n<p>A group or assembly of persons called together for a particular purpose. The term appears in only two verses in the Gospels (Mt 16:18; 18:17) but frequently in the book of Acts, most of the letters of Paul, as well as most of the remaining NT writings, especially the Revelation of John.<\/p>\n<p>One way of referring to the body of Israel in the OT was simply “the congregation.” Groups claiming to be the true Israel spiritually rather then naturally called themselves “the congregation.” The term was used by the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as by early Christians; it is the actual meaning of the word “church.” Christians often referred to themselves simply as the church or the congregation (with “of God” being understood). The term could be applied either to all believers in the world or to any local group of them. It meant the total presence of God’s people in a given location. That is why the NT often uses the singular “church” even when many groups of believers are included together (Acts 9:31; 2 Cor 1:1); the term “churches” is rarely found (Acts 15:41; 16:5). Each group or the whole group was the place where God was present (Mt 16:18; 18:17); God had purchased the congregation with the blood of his Son (Acts 20:28). The use of the word “church” in the NT is also somewhat dependent upon the Greek world. In the Greek world the word translated “church” designated an <em>assembly<\/em> of people, a meeting, such as a regularly summoned political body, or simply a <em>gathering<\/em> of people. The word is used in such a secular way in Acts 19:32, 39, 41.<\/p>\n<p>The specifically Christian usages of this concept vary considerably in the NT. (1) In analogy to the OT, it sometimes refers to a church meeting, as when Paul says to the Christians in Corinth: “When you meet as a church . . .” (1 Cor 11:18). This means that Christians are the people of God especially when they are gathered for worship. (2) In texts such as Matthew 18:17, Acts 5:11, 1 Corinthians 4:17, and Philippians 4:15, “church” refers to the entire group of Christians living in one place. Often, the local character of a Christian congregation is emphasized, as in the phrases, “the church in Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1), “in Corinth” (1 Cor 1:2), “in Thessalonica” (1 Thes 1:1). (3) In other texts, house assemblies of Christians are called churches, such as those who met in the house of Priscilla and Aquila (Rom 16:5; 1 Cor 16:19). (4) Throughout the NT, “the church” designates the universal church, to which all believers belong (see Acts 9:31; 1 Cor 6:4; Eph 1:22; Col 1:18). Jesus’ first word about the founding of the Christian movement in Matthew 16:18 has this larger meaning: “I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The church, both as a universal reality and in its local, concrete expression, is more specifically designated in Paul’s writings as “the church of God” (e.g., 1 Cor 1:2; 10:32) or “the churches of Christ” (Rom 16:16). In this way a common, secular Greek term receives its distinctive Christian meaning and sets the Christian assembly\/ gathering\/community apart from all other secular or religious groups.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear from the NT as a whole that the Christian community understood itself as the community of the end time, as the community called into being by God’s end-time act of revelation and divine presence in Jesus of Nazareth. So Paul tells the Christians in Corinth that they are those “upon whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). That is, God had visited his creation, had called out of both Judaism and the gentile world a new people, empowered by his Spirit to be present in the world, sharing the Good News (gospel) of his radical, unconditional love for his creation (Eph 2:11-22). The Gospels tell us that Jesus chose 12 disciples who became the foundation of this new people. The correspondence to the 12 tribes of Israel is clear, and it shows that the church was understood both as grounded in Judaism and as the fulfillment of God’s intention in calling Israel to become “a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth” (Is 49:6, <span>rsv<\/span>; Rom 11:1-5). It is this recognition that allows Paul to call this new Gentile-Jewish community, this new creation, “the Israel of God” (Gal 6:15-16). In this new community the traditional barriers of race, social standing, and sex—barriers that divided people from one another and categorized them into inferior and superior classes—are seen to be shattered: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28, <span>niv<\/span>). This one entity is called “the body of Christ.”<\/p>\n<p>Paul is alone among NT writers in speaking of the church as Christ’s body (Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 12:27; Eph 1:22-23; 4:12; see also 1 Cor 10:16-17; 12:12-13), or as “the body” of which Christ is the “head” (Eph 4:15; Col 1:18). The origin of this way of speaking about the church is not clear. Among a number of suggestions, two are particularly revealing about Paul’s thought: (1) The Damascus road experience. According to the accounts in Acts (9:3-7; 22:6-11; 26:12-18), Jesus identifies himself with his persecuted disciples. By persecuting these early Christians, Paul was actually fighting against Christ himself. It is possible that later reflection on this experience led Paul to the conviction that the living Christ was so identified with his community that it could be spoken of as his “body,” that is, the concrete expression of his real presence. (2) The Hebrew concept of corporate solidarity. Paul was a Hebrew of the Hebrews (Phil 3:5), and his thinking was thoroughly Jewish. In that context, the individual is largely thought of as intimately tied into the nation as a whole; the individual does not have real existence apart from the whole people. At the same time, the entire people can be seen as represented by one individual. Thus, “Israel” is both the name of one individual and the name of a whole people. The “servant” of Isaiah 42–53 can be both an individual (Is 42:1-4) and the nation of Israel (49:1-6). This idea of corporate solidarity (or personality) is the background for the intimate connection Paul makes between “the first Adam” and sinful humanity as well as between “the last (or second) Adam” (Christ) and renewed humanity (1 Cor 15:45-49; see also Rom 5:12-21).<\/p>\n<p>The reality of the intimate relation between Christ and his church is thus expressed by Paul as the organic unity and integration of the physical body (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-27). For Paul, the Lord’s Supper is a specific manifestation of this reality: “The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread” (1 Cor 10:16b-17, <span>rsv<\/span>). Since this is the case, Paul goes on to argue, all the functions of the body have their legitimate and rightful place. Division within the body (i.e., the church) reveals that there is something unhealthy within. It is this image of the church as the “body of Christ” that lies behind Paul’s repeated call for and insistence upon unity within the Christian community.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CHURCH A group or assembly of persons called together for a particular purpose. The term appears in only two verses in the Gospels (Mt 16:18; 18:17) but frequently in the book of Acts, most of the letters of Paul, as well as most of the remaining NT writings, especially the Revelation of John. One way of referring to the body of Israel in the OT was simply “the congregation.” Groups claiming to be the true Israel spiritually rather then naturally called themselves “the congregation.” The term...","summary_en":"CHURCH A group or assembly of persons called together for a particular purpose. The term appears in only two verses in the Gospels (Mt 16:18; 18:17) but frequently in the book of Acts, most of the letters of Paul, as well as most of the remaining NT writings, especially the Revelation of John. One way of referring to the body of Israel in the OT was simply “the congregation.” Groups claiming to be the true Israel spiritually rather then naturally called themselves “the congregation.” The term...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14972,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hades*","title_en":"Hades*","content_ro":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HADES*<\/h3>\n<p>Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s <em>Odyssey<\/em> 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike existence that happened to all who died, good and evil alike. Gradually they and the Romans came to see it as a place of reward and punishment, an elaborately organized and guarded realm where the good were rewarded in the Elysian Fields and the evil were punished (so described by the Roman poet Virgil, 70–19 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>“Hades” became important to the Jews as the typical term used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew name “Sheol” into Greek. This was a very suitable translation for the Hebrew term, for both words can signify the physical grave or death (Gn 37:35; Prv 5:5; 7:27), and both originally referred to a dark underworld (Jb 10:21-22) where existence was at best shadowy (Jb 38:17; Is 14:9). Sheol is described as under the ocean (Jb 26:5-6; Jon 2:2-3) and as having bars and gates (Jb 17:16). All people go there whether they are good or evil (Ps 89:48). In the earlier literature there is no hope of release from Sheol\/hades. C. S. Lewis describes this concept well in <em>The Silver Chair:<\/em> “Many sink down, and few return to the sunlit lands.” Of course, all these descriptions are in poetic literature; how literally the Hebrews (or the Greeks, for that matter) took their descriptions of hades\/Sheol is hard to say. They may have simply used the older picture-language of Greek poetry to describe that for which prose words were inadequate.<\/p>\n<p>Jew and Greek alike came in contact with Persia—the Jews at the time the postexilic writers were composing their books (e.g., Malachi, Daniel, and some psalms), and the Greeks somewhat later (they fought the Persians 520–479 <span>BC<\/span> and conquered them 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>). Whether because of Persian influence on these groups or not, during this period, the idea of reward and punishment after death developed, and Sheol\/hades changed from a shadow land to a differentiated place of reward and punishment for both Greeks (and Romans) and Jews. Josephus records that the Pharisees believed in reward and punishment at death (<em>Antiquities<\/em> 18.1.3), and a similar idea appears in 1 Enoch 22. In these and many other cases in Jewish literature, hades stands for the one place of the dead, which has two or more compartments. In other Jewish literature, hades is the place of torment for the wicked, while the righteous enter paradise (Pss of Sol 14; Wisd of Sol 2:1; 3:1). Thus, by the beginning of the NT period, hades has three meanings: (1) death, (2) the place of all the dead, and (3) the place of the wicked dead only. Context determines which meaning an author intends in a given passage.<\/p>\n<p>All these meanings appear in the NT. In Matthew 11:23 and Luke 10:15, Jesus speaks of Capernaum’s descending to hades (<span>nlt<\/span> mg). Most likely he simply means that the city will “die” or be destroyed. “Hades” means “death” in this context, as “heaven” means “exaltation.” Revelation 6:8 also exemplifies this: Death comes on a horse, and hades (a symbol of death) comes close behind. This personification of hades probably comes from the OT, where hades\/Sheol is viewed as a monster that devours people (Prv 1:12; 27:20; 30:16; Is 5:14; 28:15, 18; Hb 2:5).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:18 is a more difficult use of hades. The church will be built upon a rock and the gates of hades will not prevail against it. Here the place of the dead (complete with gates and bars) is a symbol for death: Christians may in fact be killed, but death (the gates of hades) will no more hold them than it held Christ. He who burst out of hades will bring his people out as well. This is also the meaning of Acts 2:27 (quoting Ps 16:10): Christ did not stay dead; his life did not remain in hades; unlike David, he rose from the dead. It is uncertain in either of these cases whether hades is simply a symbol for death or whether it means that Christ and the Christian actually went to a place of the dead called hades; probably the former is intended. Whatever the case, since Christ did rise, he has conquered death and hades. He appears in Revelation 1:18 as the one holding the keys (the control) to both.<\/p>\n<p>Two NT passages refer to hades as the place where the dead exist: Revelation 20:13-14 and Luke 16:23. In Revelation 20 hades is emptied of all who are in it (either all dead or the wicked dead, depending on one’s eschatology)—the resurrection is complete. When the wicked are judged and cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), hades is also thrown in. Luke 16:23, however, clearly refers to hades as the place of the wicked dead. There the rich man is tormented in a flame, while the poor man, Lazarus, goes to paradise (Abraham’s bosom).<\/p>\n<p>Hades, then, means three things in the NT, as it did in Jewish literature: (1) Death and its power is the most frequent meaning, especially in metaphorical uses. (2) It also means the place of the dead in general, when a writer wants to lump all the dead together. (3) It means, finally, the place where the wicked dead are tormented before the final judgment. This is its narrowest meaning, occurring only once in the NT (Lk 16:23). The Bible does not dwell on this torment—Dante’s picture in <em>The Inferno<\/em> draws on later speculation and Greco-Roman conceptions of hades more than on the Bible.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Gehenna; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","summary_en":"HADES* Abode of the dead. In Greek mythology Hades was originally the god of the underworld (also named Pluto), a brother of Zeus. He was the abductor of Persephone and thus the cause of winter. His realm, which was called by his name (and also called Tartarus), was the dark land where the dead existed. Odysseus entered that realm and fed the ghosts with blood to get directions back home (Homer’s Odyssey 4.834). Originally the Greeks thought of hades as simply the grave—a shadowy, ghostlike e...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24699,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30001,"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":54817,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","summary_en":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82443,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","summary_en":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110069,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","summary_en":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137695,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:18<\/strong> The phrase <em>upon this rock<\/em> is a pun on <em>Peter<\/em>’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said <em>this rock<\/em><em>,<\/em> but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (<em>my church<\/em>), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself <em>will build<\/em> it. So it is not necessary to conclude that later church leaders must derive their authority from Peter. • Matthew is the only Gospel writer who uses the term <em>church<\/em> (also Matt 18:17). The idea here is more <em>the community of God’s people<\/em> than an ecclesiastical institution. • <em>will not conquer it:<\/em> The church will not be defeated by the attacks of Satan (see 11:12; 13:24-30, 36-43).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","summary_en":"16:18 The phrase upon this rock is a pun on Peter’s name. Peter was the foundational rock in that he was the first confessor and leader of the apostles—he was the “founding member” of the church (see Eph 2:20-22; Rev 21:14). Some scholars have suggested that Jesus was referring to himself when he said this rock, but it seems clear that Jesus was referring either to Peter or to his confession. However, it is clearly Jesus’ church (my church), not Peter’s, and Jesus himself will build it. So it...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62031,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62063,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal","title_en":"Apostasy and Renewal","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","summary_en":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62309,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ethnic Hatred","title_en":"Ethnic Hatred","content_ro":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","summary_en":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89657,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89689,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal","title_en":"Apostasy and Renewal","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","summary_en":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89935,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ethnic Hatred","title_en":"Ethnic Hatred","content_ro":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","summary_en":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117283,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117315,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal","title_en":"Apostasy and Renewal","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","summary_en":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117561,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ethnic Hatred","title_en":"Ethnic Hatred","content_ro":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","summary_en":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144909,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God as Holy Warrior","title_en":"God as Holy Warrior","content_ro":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God as Holy Warrior<\/h3>\n<p>The Arabic term <em>jihad,<\/em> which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God.<\/p>\n<p>In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a prayer lament (20:5-12), which included an invocation, a complaint, a confession of trust, and a request. Jehoshaphat and the people reflected their hearts’ attitude by bowing low with their faces to the ground (20:18). The image of an army marching into battle headed by a choir giving praise to God (20:21) is startling, because the battlefield is not usually the place for worship and praise. However, worship provides a way to know the will of God, and it invites God to act to save his people. God rewards acts of trust in him, and in Jehoshaphat’s case, God brought about the defeat of a large coalition of enemy forces without Israel having to even draw their swords (20:22-24).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament portrays Jesus as the conqueror of all the principalities and powers that are arrayed against the Kingdom of God (see Eph 1:19-21). In the end, Jesus will accomplish the ultimate defeat of all enemy forces (1 Cor 15:24-28; Rev 19:11–20.15). In bringing this ultimate victory of God as king, worship will be complete: “Praise the <span>Lord<\/span>! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns” (Rev 19:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Josh 6:1-20; 10:7-15; Judg 7:7-22; 2 Kgs 19:14-37; 2 Chr 6:34-35; 20:5-7, 20-24; Isa 26:21–27:6; Jon 3:4-10; Matt 16:18; 2 Cor 10:3-6; Eph 1:19-23; 6:10-20; Rev 19:11-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","summary_en":"God as Holy Warrior The Arabic term jihad, which has become well known in the English language, speaks of a “holy war” in which men fight for God. However, the biblical description of a “holy war” is quite different. A holy war is a conflict where God fights for his people while they trust in him. In these wars, victory does not depend on weapons but on obedience to God. In a time of war, King Jehoshaphat of Judah proclaimed a fast (2 Chr 20:3) and petitioned God in the typical style of a pra...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144941,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal","title_en":"Apostasy and Renewal","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy and Renewal<\/h3>\n<p>During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread false worship (28:24-25). His apostasy was so great that more righteousness was found in the north at that time than in Judah (see 28:9-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Chronicler wrote to inspire hope that God would restore Judah. He showed that God is always willing to forgive those who repent. Repentance can make restoration and reconciliation possible, as shown by the northern leaders’ response to the prophet who confronted the victorious northern army (28:8-15). The renewal of Judah under Hezekiah also provided a paradigm for restoration and unification, a time that could be compared with Solomon’s reign. In the first year of his reign, Hezekiah began to restore the Temple (29:3); and when Hezekiah celebrated the Passover, he invited people from the northern kingdom, showing that both kingdoms could worship together at the place God had chosen (30:18-20). The glory of Solomon’s time was temporarily restored (30:26; cp. 7:8-10).<\/p>\n<p>Even exile did not bring an end to the covenant community. Healing was possible at any time the people chose to seek the Lord, whether at the occasion of returning with spoils of war, or reuniting at the Passover festival. Many of the Old Testament prophets who proclaimed judgment on apostate Judah or Israel also spoke of future renewal and restoration. The continual hope of renewal also holds true for the church, even when threatened with extinction from persecution or corruption (see Rev 2–3). God’s Kingdom stands on the solid rock of his promises (see Matt 16:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 21:1-29; 2 Chr 11:13-17; 28:1–31:21; 33:1-20; Jer 18:7-17; Ezek 16:1-63; 33:10-16; Joel 2:12-32; Luke 19:2-10; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 1 Tim 1:15-17<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","summary_en":"Apostasy and Renewal During the divided monarchy, a distinction was often made between the apostate northern kingdom and the faithful remnant of Judah. When Jeroboam founded the northern kingdom, a number of righteous people went to Judah to escape Jeroboam’s wickedness (2 Chr 11:13-17). But eventually, the southern kingdom also fell into apostasy. Ahaz became like Jeroboam: He made metal images (28:2), worshiped the gods of Damascus (28:23), neglected the Temple (28:24; 29:7, 19), and spread...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145187,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Ethnic Hatred","title_en":"Ethnic Hatred","content_ro":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Ethnic Hatred<\/h3>\n<p>Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred.<\/p>\n<p>In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatred of Mordecai the Jew developed into a murderous desire to destroy all Jews (3:6). His charge against the Jewish people was what he hated in Mordecai: They did not assimilate with other people, they had unique laws and customs, and they did not obey some of the laws of the king (3:8).<\/p>\n<p>The Spanish Inquisition (1400s) and the Holocaust in Nazi Germany (1930s–40s) were other terrible attempts to wipe the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Religious and ethnic hatred still leads to diabolical plans today.<\/p>\n<p>God disapproves of such hatred against any ethnic or religious group, and he will eventually hold accountable those who attempt to carry out such plots (see Deut 30:7; Pss 21:7-11; 34:19-21; 44:7). God has repeatedly saved the Jewish people and defeated their enemies, for God is faithful to all his promises (see Rom 9–11). He will similarly preserve his church through all persecution (see Matt 16:18; Rom 8:26-39).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 46:33-34; Deut 7:1-6; 23:3-8; Esth 3:1-9; Matt 15:22-28; Luke 4:27; Acts 10:34-35; Rom 9:1–11:36; Gal 3:26-29; Eph 2:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","summary_en":"Ethnic Hatred Selfish pride, a desire to maintain power, and hatred for those who stand in the way have often been the basis for the persecution of racial or religious groups. Many people have died through the centuries because of such hatred. In the book of Esther, Haman hated Mordecai because Mordecai would not bow down as everyone else did when Haman passed by (Esth 3:1-5). Haman thus despised a man of integrity who would not obey laws that were against his convictions. This personal hatre...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":4797,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","title_en":"of the Old Testament in the New Testament Bible*, Quotations","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, Q<span>uotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings.<\/p>\n<p>One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers.<\/p>\n<p>The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotations in distinctive print, this may not be easily seen, for the NT writers often weave the OT words into their own without indicating they are borrowing from the OT. There are over 400 passages of the OT that are explicitly cited in the NT. Almost half of these are introduced by a statement like “Scripture says” to draw attention to the fact that the authority and thought of the OT is being implemented. For the others, however, the OT words are woven into the fabric of the author’s own statement.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the over 400 passages cited explicitly, there are well over 1,000 places where there is an allusion to an OT text, event, or person. The difference between a quotation and an allusion is sometimes debated for particular texts, but usually the distinction is that in a quotation the author consciously uses the words of an OT passage, whereas with an allusion he has the texts in mind but is not consciously trying to use the words.<\/p>\n<p>Quotations are easy to identify if there is an introductory formula such as “the Scripture says” (as in Rom 10:11; cf. Is 28:16). Where there is no introductory formula, it is easy to overlook explicit quotations (Rom 10:13; cf. Jl 2:32). The allusions are, of course, harder still to recognize, but they often provide the key to interpretation. For example, John 1:14-18—with its mention of glory, grace and truth, Moses, and the fact that no one has seen God—is much more easily and profoundly understood when read in connection with Exodus 33:17–34:8. In the Exodus passage the glory of God and his grace and truth are revealed to Moses. The author was showing that a much more complete revelation of God was given in Jesus than was given Moses in the account recorded in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, significant light is shed on many NT passages from OT passages with similar ideas and words even where the NT author may not have been consciously alluding to those texts (e.g. Mt 16:19; Is 22:22). What was behind the author’s thinking is not certain, but in such cases the NT reflects the thinking, the culture, and language of the OT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DistributionofOldTestamentQuotations\">Distribution of Old Testament Quotations<\/p>\n<p>The books of the NT that show the most dependence on the OT are Matthew, John, Romans, Hebrews, 1 Peter, and Revelation. Such a statement can be misleading, however, because the writers have different methods.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew quotes or consciously reflects the wording of OT passages about 62 times, almost half of which have an introductory formula. The book of Revelation, on the other hand, never quotes the OT and never has an introductory formula but is probably more dependent on the OT than any other NT book. The book of Hebrews quotes or consciously reflects the OT about 59 times, again half of which have an introductory formula, but the Gospel of John does so only 18 times, nearly always with an introductory formula. However, the allusions to the OT are present on virtually every page of John’s Gospel, so much so that some scholars have argued that he has modeled his account on the exodus narrative, the Jewish feasts, or OT persons and images. Paul’s Letter to the Romans uses the OT 54 times (about three-fourths of which have introductory formulas), but nowhere else so frequently (e.g., 1 Cor 16 times, Gal 11 times, Phil one time, 1 Thes one time).<\/p>\n<p>In addition to the indication that Philippians and 1 Thessalonians use the OT only once each, some other books make explicit use of the OT rarely or never. Colossians, Titus, Philemon, and the Johannine letters do not use the OT at all; 2 Timothy and Jude use the OT only once; while 2 Peter and 1 Timothy make use of it twice.<\/p>\n<p>The important point is to realize that the OT is used most frequently in circumstances where the audience is familiar with the OT or where the OT is essential for describing the events relating to Christ and the church. The books using the OT most frequently (Mt, Jn, Rom, Heb, 1 Pt, Rv) either stem from or are addressed to a Jewish context or, as in the case of Romans and John, deal specifically with the relation of Jews and Christians. The Gospels make rather extensive use of the OT because the language of the OT is necessary to convey the identity and importance of Jesus in the purposes of God. Similarly 1 Peter uses the OT frequently because the author is trying to convey to his persecuted audience that they are the people of God and the inheritors of the promises of God.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DifficultiesinInterpretation\">Difficulties in Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>Often when people think of quotations of the OT in the NT they think only in terms of prophecy. Some have been guilty of counting up the OT statements that the NT applies to Christ and the church and then claiming these OT texts as predictions that prove Jesus is the Messiah. Such a procedure is filled with problems because it is too simplistic and does not do justice to either the OT or to the way the NT uses it. Of course, the early church used the OT to show that Jesus fulfilled the promises of God and did God’s work, but the use the church made of the OT was quite varied and much of it cannot be classified as predictive prophecy. Prophecy itself is too complex to be limited to predictive thinking.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the most obvious examples of the difficulties appear in Matthew’s Gospel, although they are by no means confined there. Matthew 2:15—“Out of Egypt I called my son”—is a quotation of Hosea 11:1, but in Hosea these words do not refer to the Messiah. They refer to the nation of Israel. Similarly Matthew 2:18 quotes Jeremiah 31:15 (“A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more,” <span>niv<\/span>) as fulfilled in the slaughter of the innocent babies in Bethlehem, but in Jeremiah the weeping is over the destruction of Jerusalem. John 12:40 views Isaiah 6:10 as fulfilled in Jesus’ ministry, but this verse deals with the call of Isaiah and is not a prediction concerning the ministry of the Messiah. The examples could be multiplied but these should be sufficient to illustrate the problem. For this reason the NT writers have often been accused of twisting the Scriptures, but this charge is as simplistic as the thought that all prophecy is predictive and in fact springs from the same error. Therefore, any attempt to understand the use of the OT in the NT will have to deal with the variety of ways in which the OT is used and with the methods employed by the NT writers.<\/p>\n<p>There are other difficulties that are encountered as well. Sometimes the NT writer will indicate that some fact related to Christ is a fulfillment of the OT but the explicit text that he had in mind cannot be identified. For example, John 7:38 introduces the words “Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water” with the statement “as Scripture has said.” No OT text reads this way. Possibly the allusion is to the rock that provided water in the wilderness (Ex 17:1), or to the waters that flowed from the new temple (Zec 14:8) or, more generally, it may be a reference to Isaiah 58:11. Similarly, the difficulty in determining the OT text behind the prophecy that Christ will be called a Nazarene (Mt 2:23) is notorious. Probably the reference is to Isaiah 11:1 and the Hebrew word there translated as “branch,” but the connection is not easily made and is not certain. A third example of this kind of difficulty is in 1 Corinthians 14:34, where Paul indicates that women should be in submission just as the Law says, but there is no OT text expressing this idea. His statement in probably to be understood as a summary rather than a quotation or allusion. Similarly on a few occasions an OT text is seemingly attributed to the wrong OT book. In Mark 1:2-3 an OT quotation is attributed to Isaiah but the quotation is really a conflation (or mixing) of Exodus 23:20, Malachi 3:1, and Isaiah 40:3. Matthew 27:9-10 quotes a passage that is said to be from Jeremiah, when really it is dependent on Zechariah 11:13 and might best be described as a summary of Zechariah 11:12-13, with certain words included from Jeremiah 32:6-9. These two examples do not create a major problem, however, for the determination of the origin of the words may be due to their use in collections of quotations from various prophets, in which case the more prominent prophets would be used to designate origin.<\/p>\n<p>The wording of the quotations of the OT text does not always conform to the modern form of the OT. Just as today there are numerous translations of the Bible, when the NT was being written there were various forms of the OT text. With regard to the Hebrew text (for the OT was written mostly in Hebrew), there were different traditions. Such differences in the Hebrew traditions would have been relatively small. Because of the increasing importance of Aramaic after the Babylonian captivity and of Greek after the conquests of Alexander the Great, the OT was also known and used in both these languages when the NT was being written. In fact, the Jews found it necessary in their synagogue services after reading the Hebrew OT to paraphrase the reading in Aramaic so that all could understand. These paraphrases were later written down and are known as Targums. The Greek translation of the OT that stems from the third century <span>BC<\/span> is known as the Septuagint, but there were also other Greek translations in use. This being the case, the wording of a NT quotation is not identical in every detail to the text of the Hebrew OT.<\/p>\n<p>Added to the fact that there were various forms of the text known in first-century <span>AD<\/span> Palestine is the complicating factor that NT writers often did not intend to quote the OT exactly. The use of formal quotation marks is a modern device, and ancient writers were not so taken by technical precision. They were more concerned with the intention of a text and consequently might copy or quote it verbatim, quote it from memory, use or adapt part of a verse, or even change certain words as they borrowed the verse to express their points. (The NT writers often use the OT words describing God’s actions in the past to explain what he has done in their time.) The importance of any differences between the NT quotation and the OT depends on the use to which the quotation is put and the degree to which the use is dependent on textual differences.<\/p>\n<p>Some examples should illustrate the nature of these difficulties. Ephesians 4:8 quotes Psalm 68:18. Whereas the Hebrew and Septuagint read, “You ascended to the heights, you lead captivity captive, you received gifts among mankind,” Ephesians records the verse as “After he ascended into the heights, <em>he<\/em> led captivity captive; he <em>gave<\/em> gifts to men.” Paul is stressing that Christ has given grace to people for ministry. He has either adapted the wording of the OT to make his point or he quoted a variant reading, <em>“he gave<\/em> gifts.” Some versions do have this reading. In fact, the Targum understands this verse as Moses giving the words of the law to the children of men, and Paul may well be adapting this understanding to the new revelation that has come in Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew 1:23 quotes Isaiah 7:14, but there are distinct differences between the Hebrew text and the wording in Matthew. The Hebrew reads, “Behold the young woman will become pregnant and will bear a son and you will call his name Immanuel,” whereas Matthew’s text records “Behold, the <em>virgin<\/em> will become pregnant and will bear a son, and <em>they<\/em> will call his name Immanuel.” The Septuagint does have the specific word “virgin,” like Matthew, but is not the source of Matthew’s quotation since other differences exist. Some have argued that the change from “you will call” to “they will call” was made by Matthew when he applied the words to Jesus. However, there are several traditions known for this part of the quotation and partial support for the reading in Matthew is provided by the text of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Romans 11:26-27 is a conflation of Isaiah 59:20-21 and part of Isaiah 27:9, but there are important differences. One of these is that the OT has “the redeemer will come to Zion,” whereas Romans has “the deliverer will come <em>from<\/em> Zion.” The change to “from Zion” could indicate that Paul had a different textual tradition, could be the result of an intentional change by Paul, or more probably, could reflect the wording of Psalm 14:7.<\/p>\n<p>An awareness of the difficulties involved in the quotations of the OT by the NT writers will prohibit a simplistic approach and will prevent hasty conclusions. Care to ask not only which text was used but also which form of the text was used and how is obviously essential in any serious study. In addition it is necessary to allow for the possibility that the NT writers knew forms of a text that are now lost.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMethodsoftheNewTestamentWriters\">The Methods of the New Testament Writers<\/p>\n<p>The methods used by the NT writers were not unique to them. Many of these methods were also employed in first-century Judaism. In fact, both the technique used in quoting and the understanding of the OT text itself in many cases are paralleled in Judaism. For example, from the standpoint of technique used in quoting, the same kinds of formula introductions are used in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the rabbinic writings, and elsewhere. The rabbinic technique of “pearl stringing,” that is, of applying verses from various parts of the OT (the Law, the Prophets, the Writings) to a subject, can be seen especially in Paul’s writings (note Rom 9:12-19 or 11:8-10). Somewhat related is the practice of using quotations that all contain a key word or key words (note 1 Pt 2:6-8, which draws together quotations using the word “stone,” or Rom 15:9-12, which joins OT verses referring to the “nations”).<\/p>\n<p>The methods used in the NT to interpret an OT text are also displayed in Judaism. Some passages interpret the OT “literally,” such as Jesus’ replies during temptation (see the quotations of Dt 8:3; 6:16; 6:13; in Mt 4:3-10), his teachings on marriage based on Genesis 2:24 (Mt 19:5), or Paul’s use of Habakkuk 2:4 (Rom 1:17) or Genesis 15:6 (Rom 4:3-9). Many such examples could be given. With regard to prophecy, some of these statements are fulfilled in a “literal” or “direct” way in keeping with the intention of the OT (e.g., Mi 5:2, Bethlehem as the birthplace of the Messiah; Mt 2:4-6). Jeremiah 31:31-34, the promise of the new covenant, is viewed as directly fulfilled in Christ (Heb 8:7-13). The prophecy of Joel 2:28-32 concerning the pouring out of the Spirit of the Lord is directly fulfilled in the Pentecost event (Acts 2:17-21), but the changing of the sun to darkness and the moon to blood are certainly not understood literally in connection with this event.<\/p>\n<p>A different method of interpretation is based on the concept of <em>corporate solidarity.<\/em> This technical expression is an attempt to convey the idea that the individuals among God’s people are not merely individuals; they are part of a larger whole. Consequently, what is said about the individual can apply to the whole and vice versa. This is the reason the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah is seen both as the nation (44:1) and as an individual (52:13–53:12). Also the king is sometimes viewed as representative of the nation. The easiest places to see the concept of corporate solidarity are in the effect of the sin of Achan on all the people (Jos 7) or the sin of David in numbering the people (1 Chr 21:3-8).<\/p>\n<p><em>Correspondence in history<\/em> is not so much a method of interpretation as it is a way of thinking about God. It assumes that the things that happen to God’s people are the things that have happened to previous generations and that God is faithful and operates in the present as he has in the past. Consequently, the trials and deliverance of God’s people are often expressed with words borrowed from the previous accounts of God’s people. Isaiah describes the anticipated deliverance in terms of a second exodus (11:15-16). Ezekiel describes the king set up over the people in terms of a second David (Ez 37:25). In the NT, Revelation 22 describes the new heavens and the new earth in terms of the Garden of Eden (Gn 2–3). Sometimes this technique is described as “typology,” but this term has been used for so many questionable interpretations that it is misleading. The most important thing about this concept is that it is a view of God and his working among his people.<\/p>\n<p>With these two concepts, the way that the OT is quoted in the NT can be understood. The conviction that Jesus was the promised deliverer and that the last days had dawned in his ministry are evident everywhere. The quotation of Hosea 11:1 can be used in Matthew 2:15 because of corporate solidarity and correspondence in history. What was said of the nation is true of the one who is its representative, and there is correspondence in their respective histories. Jeremiah 31:15 can be used in Matthew 2:18 because of correspondence in history and especially because Jeremiah looked forward to God’s intention for Israel and prophesied a new covenant (31:17, 31-34). Matthew saw not only the correspondence in history but believed that in Jesus this promised salvation had been granted. John 12:40 can quote Isaiah 6:10 of Jesus’ ministry, not because he twists the meaning of the OT text, but because he saw that what had happened with God’s messenger before happened again and even <em>ultimately<\/em> in Jesus’ ministry. The instances of such correspondences in history are numerous.<\/p>\n<p>There are other texts where there seems to be an <em>actualization<\/em> of the OT text. Some quotations seem to be “lived out” in the ministry of Jesus. Because of their conviction about Jesus and his kingdom, the NT writers often saw certain OT texts as appropriated and made alive by Jesus. Psalm 118:22 was not intended as a prophecy of the Messiah, but Jesus saw it as descriptive of his ministry (Mt 21:42), and the early church saw this verse as actualized in his death and resurrection (Acts 4:11). Isaiah 53 is another text that the NT views as actualized in Jesus’ ministry (see Acts 8:32-35 and 1 Pt 2:22-25). Some Christians would view Psalm 22 as a prophecy of the crucifixion of Jesus, but it seems instead to be the lament of a righteous OT sufferer. Through correspondence in history, and because Christians saw so much of the psalmist’s plight actualized in Jesus’ crucifixion, the psalm became the easiest way to describe what once again had happened to God’s righteous sufferer. The words of Isaiah 40:3 describe the ministry of John the Baptist (Mt 3:3). Jews had come to see this verse as a prophecy of God’s end-time salvation, and the early church saw John the Baptist fulfilling this forerunner’s task. Luke made this identification (Lk 3:4-6), but he applied the same role to Jesus’ disciples (9:52; 10:1). This seems to be a further example of actualization and correspondence in history. In other places the church has applied to Christians ideas that were previously understood of Christ (e.g., the stone in 1 Pt 2:4-5; the ministry of the Suffering Servant in Acts 13:46-47).<\/p>\n<p>The most convenient term to describe the way the OT is “fulfilled” in Christ is to say that the OT finds its climax in Jesus. Even where actual quotations are not involved, the OT ideas such as prophet, priest, or king are climaxed in him as the ideal and embodiment of all the OT models. He could tell religious authorities that “one greater than Solomon is here” (Mt 12:42) or “one greater than the temple is here” (Mt 12:6). Those passages involving correspondence in history or actualization also lead to the conviction that he is the climax of the OT Scriptures.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposesoftheUseoftheOldTestament\">The Purposes of the Use of the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The variety of methods of interpretation and application of the OT parallels the fact that the OT was used for a variety of purposes. People tend to think only in terms of the use of the OT to show that Jesus was the Messiah, but there are a number of other uses with a variety of goals. Many OT texts are used to show Jesus is the Messiah, the fulfillment of the OT promises (Lk 4:16-21). Without lessening the fulfillment emphasis, however, other verses are applied to Jesus for other purposes: to evangelize (Acts 8:32-25); to demonstrate or convince (Acts 13:33-35); to rebuke (Mk 7:6-7; Rom 11:7-10); and to describe (Rv 1:12-15). On the other hand, many quotations of the OT in the NT are not directly related to the Messiah. OT passages are adapted to provide a word from God on some aspect of life or ethics. For example, Jesus used Genesis 2:24 to substantiate his teaching on divorce as he attempted to deal with the issues raised by the civil regulation of divorce (Dt 24:1; Mt 19:1-12). The stress on the OT commandments shows their importance for Christians (Mt 19:16-22; Rom 13:8-10). Often OT statements deal with specific problems. The problem of pride at Corinth is solved by the quotation of Jeremiah 9:24 (“Let the one boasting, boast in the Lord,” 1 Cor 1:31). First Peter 3:10-12 incorporates Psalm 34:12-16 as ethical instructions, and 3:14-15 borrows from Isaiah 8:12-13 to address the fear of suffering. The spiritual armor in Ephesians 6:14-17 is derived largely from OT passages. Such examples are so numerous that there can be no doubt that the OT is used to describe Christian existence. In fact, nearly every subject discussed in the NT is presented somewhere via OT terms and quotations. Frequently OT passages are used to describe the church as God’s end-time community. Hosea 2:23 is used to show that those who formerly were not God’s people now are (Rom 9:25-26; 1 Pt 2:10). Several OT texts contribute to the description of the church in 1 Peter 2:9. OT texts that speak of the word of God describe the apostles’ preaching (Rom 10:8; 1 Pt 1:24-25). OT quotations describe the sinful condition of humanity (Rom 3:10-20). Salvation is explained through OT concepts and symbols and is based on OT statements (Jn 6:31-33; Gal 3:6-13). The words of Daniel describe the Second Coming (7:13-14; cf. Mt 24:30). Even the worship of early Christians was expressed through use of the OT (see Acts 4:24; Rom 11:34-35).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament OT passages cited or alluded to in the NT writings. One of the most complex problems in interpreting the Bible is in understanding how NT writers quoted the OT. Obviously nothing is so formative and authoritative for the NT writers as Scripture. However, the way that they used OT passages often seems strange to modern readers. The OT has provided the words and ideas for much of the NT. Unless one has a Bible that prints OT quotation...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":4945,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Loosing*, Binding","title_en":"and Loosing*, Binding","content_ro":"<h3>BINDING AND LOOSING*<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples (18:18).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is the only Gospel writer to record those specific words of Jesus. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus addressed similar but not identical words to the disciples after the resurrection: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn 20:23, <span>rsv<\/span>). A problem arises in identifying both the nature and the extent of the authority Jesus gave.<\/p>\n<p>“Bind” and “loose” translate two Greek words, themselves translations of words in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. Among Jesus’ Jewish contemporaries, the two Aramaic words were often used as technical rabbinic terms. They referred to the verdict of a teacher of the Law who, on the basis of his authority as an expert in the interpretation of the Mosaic law, could declare some action “bound” (forbidden) or “loosed” (permitted). (Compare Mt 23:2-3, where Jesus said: “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you,” <span>rsv<\/span>.) Among the greatest Jewish rabbis, Shammai “bound” many actions that the more liberal teacher Hillel “loosed.”<\/p>\n<p>Alongside that scribal use of the terms was their use in judicial contexts. They referred to the imposition or the removal of a ban or judgment. In that context the words meant “to condemn; imprison” and “to absolve; set free.” Both sets of meanings have been used to interpret the two texts in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>The precise meaning of the words in Matthew must be understood on the basis of their use in specific situations and in the light of the general NT understanding of apostolic authority. In Matthew 16:19 Peter’s authority to bind and loose is connected with his receiving “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Gospels the “kingdom of heaven” (that is, kingdom of God) is the sphere of God’s rule, the “community” of people whom he rules as Lord. In a figurative sense, Peter was entrusted with the keys to that kingdom, that “building.” (See 1 Cor 3:9, 16-17; Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pt 2:4-5 for the idea of the people of God as his building.) The keys symbolize the authority entrusted to Peter as the one who confessed Jesus as Lord (Mt 16:16), and as the one who represents all those disciples who utter the same confession.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:13, the scribes were understood as guardians of the kingdom, since the knowledge of God had been entrusted to them (Lk 11:52). But they did not fulfill their trust; they shut the doors of the kingdom. Therefore, their task was transferred to Peter, spokesman for the 12 disciples, who were representatives of a new Israel (see Mt 21:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Keys of the Kingdom.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BINDING AND LOOSING*<\/h3>\n<p>Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples (18:18).<\/p>\n<p>Matthew is the only Gospel writer to record those specific words of Jesus. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus addressed similar but not identical words to the disciples after the resurrection: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (Jn 20:23, <span>rsv<\/span>). A problem arises in identifying both the nature and the extent of the authority Jesus gave.<\/p>\n<p>“Bind” and “loose” translate two Greek words, themselves translations of words in Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. Among Jesus’ Jewish contemporaries, the two Aramaic words were often used as technical rabbinic terms. They referred to the verdict of a teacher of the Law who, on the basis of his authority as an expert in the interpretation of the Mosaic law, could declare some action “bound” (forbidden) or “loosed” (permitted). (Compare Mt 23:2-3, where Jesus said: “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you,” <span>rsv<\/span>.) Among the greatest Jewish rabbis, Shammai “bound” many actions that the more liberal teacher Hillel “loosed.”<\/p>\n<p>Alongside that scribal use of the terms was their use in judicial contexts. They referred to the imposition or the removal of a ban or judgment. In that context the words meant “to condemn; imprison” and “to absolve; set free.” Both sets of meanings have been used to interpret the two texts in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p>The precise meaning of the words in Matthew must be understood on the basis of their use in specific situations and in the light of the general NT understanding of apostolic authority. In Matthew 16:19 Peter’s authority to bind and loose is connected with his receiving “the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” In the Gospels the “kingdom of heaven” (that is, kingdom of God) is the sphere of God’s rule, the “community” of people whom he rules as Lord. In a figurative sense, Peter was entrusted with the keys to that kingdom, that “building.” (See 1 Cor 3:9, 16-17; Eph 2:20-22; 1 Pt 2:4-5 for the idea of the people of God as his building.) The keys symbolize the authority entrusted to Peter as the one who confessed Jesus as Lord (Mt 16:16), and as the one who represents all those disciples who utter the same confession.<\/p>\n<p>According to Matthew 23:13, the scribes were understood as guardians of the kingdom, since the knowledge of God had been entrusted to them (Lk 11:52). But they did not fulfill their trust; they shut the doors of the kingdom. Therefore, their task was transferred to Peter, spokesman for the 12 disciples, who were representatives of a new Israel (see Mt 21:43).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Keys of the Kingdom.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BINDING AND LOOSING* Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, rsv). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples ...","summary_en":"BINDING AND LOOSING* Biblical concept much discussed and debated throughout Christian history. Jesus referred to binding and loosing on two different occasions. After Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah, Jesus said to him: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Mt 16:19, rsv). Later, Jesus gave the same authority to bind and loose to all of the disciples ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9655,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple","title_en":"Disciple","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":21663,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Keys of the Kingdom","title_en":"Keys of the Kingdom","content_ro":"<h3>KEYS OF THE KINGDOM<\/h3>\n<p>Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of Jesus give God the key to the abode of the dead. In the book of Revelation, John sees Christ holding the keys of death and hades (Rv 1:18; see 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s Gospel the keys symbolize the authority to open and shut the kingdom of heaven. In response to Peter’s declaration that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:16), Jesus entrusts authority to “bind” and “loose” to Peter (v 19). This authority is later extended to the other disciples (18:18). The words “bind” and “loose” were used by rabbis near the time of Christ to declare someone under a ban (“binding”) and relief of the ban (“loosing”). Sometimes this referred to expulsion or reinstatement at a synagogue. At other times binding and loosing indicated consignment to God’s judgment or acquittal from it. The “power of the keys” (or binding and loosing) of which Jesus speaks is a spiritual authority like that he gave the disciples in John 20:23: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees and scribes assumed that as teachers of the law they had power to shut the kingdom of heaven against others (Mt 23:13). Yet as blind guides they failed to recognize what Peter had acknowledged—that Jesus was the one in whom God’s kingdom had come. The keys of the kingdom authorized the pronouncement of judgment and the promise of forgiveness—not by human authority, but on the basis of Christ’s word.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>KEYS OF THE KINGDOM<\/h3>\n<p>Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of Jesus give God the key to the abode of the dead. In the book of Revelation, John sees Christ holding the keys of death and hades (Rv 1:18; see 3:7).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew’s Gospel the keys symbolize the authority to open and shut the kingdom of heaven. In response to Peter’s declaration that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Mt 16:16), Jesus entrusts authority to “bind” and “loose” to Peter (v 19). This authority is later extended to the other disciples (18:18). The words “bind” and “loose” were used by rabbis near the time of Christ to declare someone under a ban (“binding”) and relief of the ban (“loosing”). Sometimes this referred to expulsion or reinstatement at a synagogue. At other times binding and loosing indicated consignment to God’s judgment or acquittal from it. The “power of the keys” (or binding and loosing) of which Jesus speaks is a spiritual authority like that he gave the disciples in John 20:23: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The Pharisees and scribes assumed that as teachers of the law they had power to shut the kingdom of heaven against others (Mt 23:13). Yet as blind guides they failed to recognize what Peter had acknowledged—that Jesus was the one in whom God’s kingdom had come. The keys of the kingdom authorized the pronouncement of judgment and the promise of forgiveness—not by human authority, but on the basis of Christ’s word.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Kingdom of God, Kingdom of Heaven.<\/p>","summary_ro":"KEYS OF THE KINGDOM Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (rsv). Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of J...","summary_en":"KEYS OF THE KINGDOM Symbolic description of the authority given by Jesus to Peter in Matthew 16:19: “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (rsv). Many ancient peoples believed that heaven and hell were closed by gates to which certain deities and angelic beings had keys. In Greek mythology, for example, Pluto kept the key to hades. Jewish writings near the time of J...","source":"Articles\/K.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30054,"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":54818,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","summary_en":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82444,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","summary_en":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110070,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","summary_en":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137696,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:19<\/strong> <em>Keys<\/em> are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • <em>will be:<\/em> This could be translated <em>will have been<\/em>, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","summary_en":"16:19 Keys are an image for access to privileged knowledge that gives one authority (see 13:16-17; 23:13; Isa 22:22; Rev 3:7). • forbid . . . permit: Jesus granted to Peter (and later to the rest of the Twelve, Matt 18:18) the authority to teach the will of God as revealed in Jesus Christ (13:52; 18:15-20; 23:2-12; 28:16-20). • will be: This could be translated will have been, emphasizing that God’s sovereign decision comes first.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":24786,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65364,"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":92990,"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":120616,"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":148242,"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}],"21":[{"id":42126,"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":69752,"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":97378,"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":125004,"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":9648,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Disciple","title_en":"Disciple","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLE<\/h3>\n<p>Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels the immediate followers of Jesus, called by his authority from a wide variety of circumstances, not only the Twelve but all those who were sympathetic to his teaching and committed to him, are called “disciples.” The calling of these disciples took place at a time when other teachers had their disciples, most notably the Pharisees (Mk 2:18; Lk 5:33) and John the Baptist (Mt 9:14). It is evident from the practice of John the Baptist that different leaders called for different disciplines from their followers. John’s way was considerably more ascetic in character than that of Jesus; however, it too involved not only teaching regarding conduct and manner of life, but also a distinctive pattern of praying (Lk 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>The disciples of Jesus had a unique experience. Not only did they benefit from the immediate teaching of Jesus, his looks and tones of voice (Mk 10:21) as well as his words, but they were also witnesses of the unfolding drama of redemption that had Christ as its center. They followed a teacher who embodied the substance of that teaching. The first disciples could be taught by Christ only little by little, not only because of the need to remove their misconceptions (Mt 16:21), but also because the full significance of what Jesus said and did could not be most fully appreciated until after the events of his death and resurrection (Mt 28:9). It is not surprising that the period of “discipling” covered the time before and after Christ’s death and resurrection, and also after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit taught the disciples about matters that they could not “bear” while Jesus remained on earth (Jn 16:12).<\/p>\n<p>Groups of Jesus’ first disciples, both the Twelve and the Seventy (Mt 26:20: Lk 10:1), received his teaching, taught others in turn (Lk 10:1-11), and were given power to heal (Mt 10:1). They were also to proclaim the message of salvation through Christ. Yet the Twelve were given special prominence, and with the exception of Judas Iscariot (whose place was taken by Matthias, Acts 1:26), they became the foundation teachers of the newly emerging Christian church. Their authority in the church, given by Christ (Mt 16:19; 28:16-20), was to be characterized by a unique style of self-giving service (Lk 22:24-30). To this group of disciples, who came to be known as the apostles (though this term is occasionally given to a wider application), Saul of Tarsus was added. At his conversion on the road to Damascus, he saw the risen Lord and was immediately commissioned by Christ (Gal 1:12, 16) as the apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15).<\/p>\n<p>At the time of his ascension Christ commissioned the first disciples to “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 28:19); hence, the term “disciple” is also used in the book of Acts to describe believers, those who confess Christ. Though they have not been directly called by Christ himself, such disciples are called by Christ’s Spirit through the message delivered by the first disciples; disciples called later are not in any sense inferior to the first disciples, even though they are less privileged. It was proper for early Christians to be called disciples of Jesus of Nazareth or simply “the disciples” (Acts 6:1-2, 7; 9:36; 11:26) because they were carrying on the teaching of Jesus and living the life he had exemplified. They were thus recognized as a “school” or living community that embodied the teaching of their “master” in practice. The book of 1 John emphasizes that only those who keep Christ’s commandments show real love for God (1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:10-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLE Someone who follows another person or another way of life and who submits himself to the discipline (teaching) of that leader or way. In the Bible the term “disciple” is found almost exclusively in the Gospels and the book of Acts, the only exceptions being Isaiah 8:16 and less directly Isaiah 50:4 and 54:13, where the same Hebrew word is translated “learned” and “taught,” respectively. Yet clearly wherever there is a teacher and those taught, the idea of discipleship is present. In ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10304,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Elder","title_en":"Elder","content_ro":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ELDER<\/h3>\n<p>Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder or groups of elders can also be found in the world surrounding ancient Israel and in the Greco-Roman world of the NT period.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The elder, or the institution of elders, is closely linked with the tribal system. Tribes were composed of clans, and clans of large, extended family units. By virtue of age and function in a patriarchal society, the father of a family ruled. This fact of age, as well as the wisdom and maturity invested in older persons, is undoubtedly the origin of the authority that these elders exercised. A clan was ruled by the heads of the families constituting it, forming a council of elders. In time of war, each clan furnished a contingent; these were led by a chief, probably chosen from the ranks of the elders.<\/p>\n<p>In Israel’s premonarchy period, local administration and judicial action was largely in the hands of those elders. In the exodus narrative, it was the elders of Israel (heads of families) who were instructed by Moses concerning the first Passover meal (Ex 12:21-22). It was these elders who, in Exodus 18:12, met with Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, and from whose ranks were chosen worthy representatives to assist Moses in the interpretation of the law of God and the administration of justice (18:13-23). Similarly, according to Numbers 11:16-17, Moses was instructed by God to select 70 men from among the elders of Israel to assist him in leadership of the people. In this latter account, the elders were marked by a special endowment of God’s Spirit. In the former the elders—chosen as coadministrators with Moses—were those known to be trustworthy.<\/p>\n<p>A central function of elders was the administration of justice. They were the “judges,” who sat “in the gate,” the traditional courtroom of ancient villages and towns. Here disputes and trials were settled by the elders, and community affairs were discussed and decisions made (Gn 23:10, 18; Jb 29:7; Prv 24:7; 31:23). The preservation and application of the law was clearly in the hands of elders who sat at the gate of the town (Dt 19:12; 21:19; 22:15; 25:7-10). Ruth 4:1-12 provides an excellent description of such a process.<\/p>\n<p>During the period of the monarchy, local administration and judicial authority continued to be invested in councils of elders. At the end of Saul’s reign, David sent messages and gifts to the elders of the towns of Judah (1 Sm 30:26), obviously recognizing that his efficient rule would depend on their goodwill and allegiance. In the time of Jehu (2 Kgs 10:5), we hear of elders in Samaria, side by side with a governor and master of the palace. To facilitate her plot against Naboth, Jezebel wrote instructions to the elders and nobles of Jezreel (1 Kgs 21:8-11). Again, Josiah convened the elders of Judah and Jerusalem to hear the reading of the law and to enter with him into a new covenant of obedience (2 Kgs 23:1). It is clear that the elders of Israel were now responsible for the application of the law within their jurisdictions. Besides administrative and judicial functions, elders also assumed cultic roles (Ex 24:1, 9; Lv 4:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The institution of the elders survived the collapse of the royal institutions. Elders were present during the exile (Ez 8:1; 14:1; 20:1-3) as well as after the return (e.g., Ezr 10:16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJudaismoftheNewTestamentPeriod\">In Judaism of the New Testament Period<\/p>\n<p>While use of the title “elder” to designate officers of various Greek cult associations and village magistrates may have influenced the development of community structure in the gentile churches, the Christian office (or function) of elder stems from a very similar institution within Judaism. In the first three Gospels and in Acts there are numerous references to elders as functionaries within the communal and religious life of Judaism. Generally they are mentioned together with one or more other groups of functionaries (quoting the <span>rsv<\/span>): “elders and chief priests and scribes” (Mt 16:21); “chief priests and elders of the people” (21:23; 26:3, 47); “scribes and elders” (26:57; 27:41); “chief priests and elders” (27:1, 3, 12, 20); “rulers and elders and scribes” (Acts 4:5); “rulers of the people and elders” (v 8). From these NT passages we cannot determine what exactly their functions were, or how they differed from rulers or scribes. However, the duties of Jewish elders are clearly described in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> in the Mishnah, as well as in the community rule books of the Qumran ascetics, discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.<\/p>\n<p>Each Jewish community had its council of elders, who had general administrative oversight and represented the community in relations with Roman authorities. Their primary duty was judicial. They were custodians of the law and its traditional interpretations (see Mt 15:2), and they were charged with both its enforcement and the punishment of offenders. The most important of these councils of elders was the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, a group of 71 men who acted as the final court for the entire nation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheChristianCommunity\">In the Christian Community<\/p>\n<p>Since the primitive church eventually regarded itself as the new Israel (Mt 21:43; Gal 6:16), it is easy to see why it should gradually adopt the institution of elders. Though it is difficult to make out the order that prevailed in the first Christian communities, because it apparently varied according to place and time in both form and extent, the presence and functioning of elders was part of the reality of early church life.<\/p>\n<p>In Luke’s account of the origin and spread of Christianity, the elders are already present in the church at Jerusalem. In Acts we see Christians at Antioch sending famine relief “to the elders [of the Judean churches] by Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:30). On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas “appointed elders in every church” (14:23). Later, Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem “to the apostles and elders” about the question of circumcision of gentile Christians (15:2), and were “welcomed by the church, and the apostles, and the elders” (v 4), who gathered to hear the case and resolve the issue (vv 6-23).<\/p>\n<p>Who these elders were, and how they were chosen, we are not told. It seems possible to argue, on the basis of Jewish precedent, that age and prominence gave them the privilege of rendering special service within the community. Veneration for age was a deeply rooted sentiment among Jews, and the name “presbyter” (elder) was derived from Jewish usage. It is also possible that, like the appointment of “the seven” for special service by the laying on of hands (6:1-6), the first elders in the Jerusalem church were appointed by the apostles. Apparently they functioned in the Christian community in ways comparable to the elders in the Jewish communities and the Sanhedrin (11:30; 15:2-6, 22-23; 16:4; 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Paul apparently continued the practice among the gentile churches, though elders are not mentioned in the earliest Pauline writings. They are mentioned only in the Pastoral Epistles (1 Tm 5:17, 19; Ti 1:5). On his last journey to Jerusalem, Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus to Miletus (Acts 20:17) to bid them farewell, and to instruct them to be faithful in their task of overseeing and caring for the Christian flock, the church of God (20:28).<\/p>\n<p>Although elders are not explicitly mentioned in Paul’s early letters, they may have been among the leaders who presided over the congregations (Rom 12:8; 1 Thes 5:12-13). Philippians 1:1 certainly reveals a definite stratification of leadership (“overseers and deacons”) within a young Pauline congregation. And 1 Timothy 5:17, reflecting what is often considered a later phase in the development of church government, attributes the functions of preaching and teaching to the ruling elders. Further, that Christian elders exercised pastoral functions may be inferred from 1 Peter 5:1-5 and James 5:14.<\/p>\n<p>There is one passage where we find a possible identification of an apostle (Peter) as also being an elder: “I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ” (1 Pt 5:1a, <span>rsv<\/span>). This text may indicate that elders were appointed and functioned as extensions of apostolic servanthood. Paul’s practice of appointing elders in the churches before his departure may support such a suggestion. The fact that in the tradition of the later church the “elder” of 2 and 3 John was identified as the apostle John points in a similar direction. Though such an identification is implicit, the apostles could function as elders but not the other way around.<\/p>\n<p>The elders had several functions. For example, 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders as involved in preaching and teaching; James 5:14 sees them involved in a healing ministry; 1 Peter 5:2 exhorts them to tend the flock. Thus, the prophets and teachers who led the church at Antioch (according to Acts 13:1-3) may well have been the elders of this community.<\/p>\n<p>The diaconate, too, whose roots are to be seen in the selection of “the seven” for service to those in need (Acts 6:1-3), was not restricted to purely external service. Two of these men, whom Luke introduces to us as deacons, appear at the same time as evangelists who were particularly effective as preachers of the Word, performers of miracles, expounders of the Scriptures (Stephen, Acts 6:8-10; Philip, Acts 8:4-13, 26-40).<\/p>\n<p>Whereas in the later church bishops and elders were clearly distinguished, the NT reflects an early period when these offices were virtually synonymous. In Paul’s farewell speech at Miletus (Acts 20), addressed specifically to the Ephesian church elders (v 17), he tells them that the Holy Spirit has made them “overseers, to care for the church of God” (v 28). Whether “overseer” is used here in the later technical sense of bishop or the more general sense of guardian is not clear. However, in Titus 1:5-7, the elders of verse 5 are clearly the same persons as the bishops of verse 7. Again, the bishops of Philippians 1:1 are likely to be understood as the elders appointed by Paul upon his leaving this mission station.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that church government in the NT period was still relatively fluid, but the seeds for the later structures were surely planted. The institution of the elders, on the basis of Jewish precedent, was central. The episcopate (overseers\/bishops) probably emerged out of the presbyterian (elders), one elder being appointed as overseer by the entire council of elders.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Deacon, Deaconess; Pastor; Presbyter; Spiritual Gifts.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","summary_en":"ELDER Person who, by virtue of position in the family, clan, or tribe; or by reason of personality, prowess, stature, or influence; or through a process of appointment and ordination, exercised leadership and judicial functions in both religious and secular spheres in the ancient world, both among biblical and nonbiblical peoples. The roots of the development of the presbytery (group of elders) in the NT and postapostolic church originate in Judaism and the OT, though the figure of the elder ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":11343,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Exaltation","title_en":"of Christ*, Exaltation","content_ro":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","summary_en":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19510,"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":19613,"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":24787,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel of Matthew","title_en":"Gospel of Matthew","content_ro":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MATTHEW, Gospel of<\/h3>\n<p>First Gospel and first book of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel writers did. Perhaps he did this to show how great an ascendancy he had been granted when the Lord called him, for tax collectors were despised and considered the lowest of people. The Gospel itself bears the impress of one knowledgeable of currency, for the Gospel writer speaks quite specifically about a two-drachma tax (Mt 17:24), a four-drachma coin (v 27), and the various talents (18:24; 25:15ff.).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DateandProvenance\">Date and Provenance<\/p>\n<p>Scholars are divided about the date when Matthew was written primarily because there is still debate about which Gospel was first written: Matthew or Mark. If Mark was written before Matthew, then Matthew was very indebted to Mark for a great deal of material, and vice versa. Those who argue for Matthew’s priority do so on the basis that Matthew’s Gospel was (1) recognized in the early church as the first Gospel, (2) written to those who first needed a written account—the Jews, and (3) placed first in the NT canon. Whether it preceded or followed Mark, most scholars are certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem (<span>AD<\/span> 70) because the temple is spoken of as still standing (Mt 24:15). Irenaeus indicated that Matthew wrote this Gospel while Peter and Paul were in Rome. This would make the time of writing in the 60s.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<h5>Apologetics<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew wrote to a community of Greek-speaking Jewish Christians, located in a center such as Antioch in Syria. The community was surrounded and beset by Jews hostile to the claims of Jesus and the Christian community.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew wrote as a Jew for Jews. In Jesus of Nazareth, Matthew contends, the OT reached its appointed goal. Jesus is the Messiah of Israel’s expectation. In the opening chapter Matthew identifies him as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), indeed as “God with us” (v 23). In later chapters Jesus is revealed as the Son of Man of Daniel 7 and the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book (Mt 1:22–27:10) the events of Jesus’ life are represented as the “fulfillment” of OT prophecies. He comes to offer Israel salvation from sin (1:21). Nevertheless, the Jews have rejected him as their Messiah, and have thus placed themselves in the most perilous position (11:20-24; 21:33-46). One explanation for Israel’s rejection of Jesus is the failure of the Jewish religious leadership to prepare the people for his coming. In the strongest language, Matthew denounces the teachers of the law and the Pharisees. They have forsaken the Word of God in favor of their own traditions (ch 15).<\/p>\n<h5>Teaching the Church<\/h5>\n<p>Matthew also wrote as a Christian for Christians. He presents Jesus as a new Moses, indeed as Yahweh incarnate, expounding his own law for his people (ch 5), now newly constituted around his person under the leadership of the apostles (10:2-4; 16:18-19; 23:8-10). If the Christian church is to function properly, the teaching of the Messiah on a host of moral and spiritual issues must be taken with utmost seriousness (chs 5–7, 18). To aid this purpose, Matthew takes the form of a theological textbook or a handbook for the church, to instruct the people of God concerning the person and work of Jesus. That these teachings may be more readily and firmly grasped, Matthew presents them in a highly organized and memorable way. To facilitate the learning of the material, he arranges Jesus’ teachings in five major discourses (interlocked with narrative portions) in which teachings of the same kind are clustered together (e.g., ch 10 consists of a charge to missionaries, and ch 13 consists of seven parables of the kingdom). Matthew’s leading theological themes may be identified as the <em>Son<\/em> of God (Jesus is Yahweh incarnate, “God with us”), the <em>kingdom<\/em> of God (in Jesus, God is invading history to inaugurate his final rule), the <em>salvation<\/em> of God (as the servant-king, Jesus has come to “save his people from their sins,” 1:21), and the <em>people<\/em> of God (Jesus has come to build his church, a redeemed community consisting of both Jews and Gentiles).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Savior (1:1–2:23)<\/h5>\n<p>His name reveals his mission: “Jesus” (1:1) means “Yahweh saves.” He is “the son of Abraham,” who comes to fulfill God’s ancient promises to Jews and Gentiles (Gn 12:1-3). He is “Christ [or Messiah],” the son of David (Mt 1:1), who comes to inaugurate the kingdom of God (4:17). More than that, as evidenced both by prophecy (1:22-23) and by the nature of his conception (vv 18-20), he is “God with us”—now come to “save his people from their sins” (v 21). As the son of David, and in accord with prophecy, he is born in Bethlehem (2:1-6). Drawn by the star of Israel’s Messiah (cf. Nm 24:17), Gentiles come to worship him (Mt 2:1-12). When Herod seeks to destroy him, Jesus finds sanctuary in a gentile land; God’s calling his Son from Egypt marks the beginning of a mighty saving work—nothing less than a new exodus under Jesus, the new Moses (vv 13-20). Having been born in the humblest of circumstances, Jesus now comes to live in Nazareth (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Beginnings of Ministry (3:1–4:25)<\/h5>\n<p>In face of the judgment that Jesus is about to execute (as evidence of the kingdom’s arrival), John the Baptist calls Israel to repentance (3:1-12). Jesus’ submission to John’s baptism, and the voice from heaven, show him to be a King who serves his subjects by taking their sins upon himself (vv 13-17). Like Israel at the exodus, Jesus is led into the wilderness for a period of testing (4:1). When the devil seeks to turn him away both from God and from his appointed mission, Jesus gains victory by depending upon God and his Word (vv 1-11). Returning to Galilee, Jesus deliberately settles in territory with both Jewish and Gentile inhabitants (vv 12-16) and begins a ministry of preaching (like John, he calls for repentance in face of the dawning kingdom), teaching (he calls his first disciples), and healing (vv 17-25).<\/p>\n\n<h5>The Sermon on the Mount (5:1–7:29)<\/h5>\n<p>Just as Moses ascended Sinai to receive God’s law for Israel, so Jesus—as both the new Moses and as God incarnate—ascends the mountain to set forth his instruction for the citizens of the kingdom of God (5:1-2). He begins with <em>gospel<\/em> (not law), declaring that God shall surely save those who—beset by sin—trust in God’s mercy, obey his commands, and long for him to establish his righteous rule in the earth (vv 3-12). Toward that end, disciples are a preservative (salt) and a witness (light) in a sinful society (vv 13-16). As the one who has come not to abolish the Law and the Prophets but to bring them to completion (i.e., to usher in the new age to which the OT pointed— v 17), Jesus calls his disciples to steadfast obedience to God’s law as now expounded by the Lawgiver himself (vv 18-20). God’s commands embrace inner desires as well as outward actions, must not be watered down or rationalized, and call for more radical obedience than ever before, now that the end has come (vv 21-48). In their giving, praying, and fasting, disciples are to combat hypocrisy by God-centeredness and self-forgetfulness (6:1-18). The Lord’s Prayer (vv 9-13) calls upon God to honor his name by establishing his rule on earth, and to pardon, protect, and provide for his children. Given this prayer, and given the disciples’ God-centered view of reality (vv 19-24), there is no cause for anxiety (vv 25-34). Disciples must be discerning without being judgmental (7:1-6), and depend on God for the power needed to love others (6:7-12). Having completed his exposition of the law (5:21–7:12), Jesus now calls would-be disciples to follow him (7:13-14), warns against false teachers (vv 15-20), and insists that true disciples do God’s will (vv 21-23).<\/p>\n<h5>The Authority of Jesus (8:1–9:38)<\/h5>\n<p>Having given his authority <em>verbal<\/em> expression in teaching (7:28-29), Jesus now gives it <em>visible<\/em> expression in a series of healing miracles, again revealing himself as the servant of Isaiah (8:17). He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, and a bleeding woman by his word (8:1-13; 9:20-22). His touch dispels a fever and raises a dead person (8:14-15; 9:23-25). A combination of word and touch cures the blind (9:27-31). As “God with us,” Jesus calls for unqualified allegiance (8:18-22). Though lacking even the natural protection enjoyed by animals (v 20), he demonstrates his sovereignty over the natural world—and thus his deity—by calming the storm (vv 23-27). In direct confrontations with demons, he shows his superiority over them (8:28-34; 9:32-33). Exercising God’s own authority, he declares sins forgiven (9:1-8) and calls sinners to repentance and to discipleship (vv 9-13). Joy over the kingdom’s inauguration is mingled with longing for its consummation (vv 14-17). The summary of 9:35-38 echoes 4:23-25, recalls chapters 5–7, and prepares for the next major discourse.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Charge to the Missionaries (10:1-42)<\/h5>\n<p>In response to the prayers that he has commanded, Christ now invests 12 disciples with apostolic authority and sends them out into his harvest field (9:37–10:4). The discourse speaks both of the apostles’ immediate mission (10:5-15) and of the church’s broader mission (vv 16-42). For now, the apostles are to concentrate on evangelizing Jews (v 6), in preparation for the mission to Gentiles (28:19). The “worthy” are those who welcome the apostles and their message; the “unworthy,” those who reject them (10:11-15). In the broader mission, there is sure to be persecution (vv 16-19, 24-25), but this will actually aid the witness (vv 17-23). God will save his faithful missionaries (vv 19-23) but judge those who oppress them and who disown Christ (vv 26-39). A sure reward awaits both the herald and the recipient of the message (vv 37-42).<\/p>\n<h5>Christ the Lord (11:1–12:50)<\/h5>\n<p>The judgment John predicted is already under way; one’s stand in the last judgment would be determined by his response to the words and works of Jesus (11:2-6). Like his herald, Jesus meets with widespread hostility and indifference (vv 7-19). Given the finality of the grace attending his ministry, those who reject him will suffer the severest judgment (vv 20-24). Yet there are others—the lowly, the burdened, the teachable—who learn (by revelation from God the Father and God the Son) that the “Lord of heaven and earth” is also the “gentle and humble” God who comes to give rest to those who trust in him (vv 25-30). As the one who ushers in the new age (12:6), Jesus claims that he is the Lord of the Sabbath (vv 1-8). True rest (11:29) comes to those who come to Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Viewing Jesus as the destroyer of the Sabbath, the Pharisees ascribe his miraculous powers to Satan (12:22-24). On the contrary, says Jesus, the rule he is inaugurating is crushing Satan’s empire (vv 25-29). To reject this truth in the full awareness of what one is doing is to commit the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit (vv 30-32); the words of Jesus’ accusers expose them as persons destined for condemnation (vv 33-37). The requested sign from heaven will not be given. Jesus’ resurrection is the only sign they need.<\/p>\n<h5>The Parables of the Kingdom (13:1-58)<\/h5>\n<p>This, the third of Matthew’s five great discourses, contains seven parables. In the parable of the sower, four kinds of soil—hard, shallow, cluttered, and fruitful—illustrate the various responses to Jesus’ preaching (13:3-9, 18-23). As those who have received Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom (4:17), the disciples are given more light, but the crowds must accept that initial proclamation before further light is given (13:10-17, 34-35). In both the parable of the weeds (vv 24-30, 36-43) and the parable of the net (vv 47-50), Jesus assures his disciples that the final judgment will separate true believers from false, and warns against hasty, premature judgments (cf. 7:1-5). The parables of the mustard and the yeast (13:31-33) contrast the smallness of the kingdom’s inauguration with the fullness of its consummation. The parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl (vv 44-46) depict the kingdom as a value far surpassing all others (cf. 6:33). Thus illuminated by Jesus, disciples have new treasures to add to their old (13:51-52). The people of Nazareth, on the contrary, echo the crowds’ lack of understanding and the Pharisees’ hostility (vv 53-58).<\/p>\n<h5>Spiritual Conflict (14:1–16:12)<\/h5>\n<p>In 14:1-12 the preaching of John exposes the weakness of Herod, and the beheading of John anticipates the crucifixion of Jesus (cf. 17:12). The true king is not Herod but Jesus. He is sovereign over nature itself (14:13-36)—God incarnate, “God with us,” who feeds the hungry multitude in the wilderness (as God once provided manna) and walks upon and calms the sea (see Ps 89:9). Peter models Christians’ faith, fear, and utter dependence on Jesus (Mt 14:28-31). The Pharisees and teachers of the law appear to worship God but in fact are devoted to their own traditions, which they offer not as supplements but as <em>rivals<\/em> to the Word of God (15:1-9). In verses 10-20 Jesus teaches both that ceremonial law apart from moral law becomes empty ritual, and that the old distinction between clean and unclean foods (Lv 11) is now as obsolete as the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. To underscore the point, Jesus enters pagan territory, heals a Canaanite (15:21-28) and feeds a Gentile multitude (vv 29-39). Pharisees and Sadducees, for all their differences, are united in their opposition to Jesus (16:1-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming Salvation (16:13–17:27)<\/h5>\n<p>Going beyond the crowds’ respectful but inadequate estimates, Peter confesses Jesus to be “the Christ, the Son of the living God”—a recognition of Jesus’ deity granted by divine revelation (16:13-17; cf. 11:25-26). As it is God the Son who possesses and builds the church, Satan and death are victims rather than victors. Jesus will build his church on Peter’s confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. The apostles’ prohibiting and granting entry into the church (“binding” and “loosing,” respectively) depends upon the prior decision of heaven (i.e., God’s revelation of apostolic teaching). In face of Peter’s confession and the persistent false notions of messiahship (16:20, 23), Jesus now (for the first time) predicts his sufferings and coming glory (vv 21-28). In anticipation of that glory, Jesus is transfigured before certain disciples; Moses and Elijah join God the Father in bearing witness to the unique splendor of God the Son (17:1-8). Jesus then demonstrated his power by combating demonic powers (vv 14-18) and exhibited his authority by choosing to pay the temple tax using miraculous means (vv 24-27).<\/p>\n<h5>Greatness in the Kingdom (18:1-35)<\/h5>\n<p>In this, the fourth of Matthew’s five great discourses, Jesus concentrates on the character and attitudes of church members. He calls upon his followers both to <em>become<\/em> and to <em>welcome<\/em> the lowliest (18:1-5). Leaders especially are enjoined to deal harshly with themselves but gently with those under their care (vv 6-9). Remembering the Father’s love for sinners, Christians are to make every effort (both by prayer and by personal initiative) to restore offending brothers, with excommunication being the last resort (vv 10-20). Church members who really understand the Father’s amazing grace will never stop offering forgiveness and compassion to those who wrong them (vv 21-35).<\/p>\n<h5>Instructions on the Way to Jerusalem (19:1–20:34)<\/h5>\n<p>Given God’s creation ordinances, says Jesus, divorce itself is never <em>commanded;<\/em> it is only <em>permitted<\/em> in the case of sin—that is, where the marital bond has already been severed through infidelity (19:1-9). As in 5:17-48, Jesus calls his followers to radical obedience (19:10-12). Besides instructing disciples to become like children (18:1-4), Jesus embraces children themselves with his love (19:13-15). He appeals likewise to the rich young man (vv 16-22); but the man, while faithful to the commands about love of neighbor, is too bound by his wealth to give himself unreservedly to loving God. Yet those who abandon all to follow Jesus will receive wealth untold in the coming kingdom (vv 27-30). The basis for such blessings lies not in human merit but in the astonishing generosity of the gracious God (20:1-16). None—not even the rich—are beyond the power of his grace. But God offers free salvation at great cost to himself (vv 17-19). Confronting competitiveness and ambition among his followers, Jesus teaches them that true greatness lies not in lording it over others but in serving them (vv 20-34), as shall be supremely demonstrated in his death as “a ransom for many” (v 28).<\/p>\n<h5>Confrontations in Jerusalem (21:1–22:46)<\/h5>\n<p>As the Servant-King (cf. 3:17), and as the Messiah destined for suffering (cf. 16:16-21; 20:28), Jesus enters Jerusalem not upon a war horse but upon a donkey’s colt, for he purposes not to declare war on his enemies but to hand himself over to them—and thus achieve his triumph through defeat (21:1-11). As Lord of the temple, he demands that its commerce be halted and that it become (as God ordained) a place of worship for everyone, including the sick, the young, and the alien (21:12-17; cf. Mk 11:17). He outwits those who refuse to acknowledge the heavenly source of his and John’s authority (Mt 21:23-27). In dramatic and devastating fashion, first visibly (by cursing the fig tree—vv 18-22) and then verbally (in the three parables of 21:28–22:14), Jesus pronounces judgment upon those Jews who have refused to acknowledge him as Messiah and Son of God. Henceforth, the true people of God are those who believe in Jesus, whether Jews or Gentiles. He calls upon his people to pledge their supreme allegiance to God. In the resurrection what will matter most is one’s relationship to God (22:23-33). Indeed, he who loves God with his whole being and his neighbor as himself has kept the two foundational commandments of the OT (vv 34-40). Henceforth, submitting to God means rightly recognizing Jesus; he is indeed David’s son (Mt 1:1), but he is supremely David’s Lord—the exalted Son of God (22:41-46; cf. 16:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees (23:1-39)<\/h5>\n<p>Five reasons are stated for Jesus’ denunciation of the Jewish religious leaders. First is their hypocrisy: their practice contradicts their teaching (23:1-4), their external purity conceals inner rottenness (vv 25-28), and they appear to champion God’s cause but are really enemies of God’s servants (vv 29-36). Second is the pride that prompts their hypocrisy (23:5-12). Third is their exploitation of, and their baleful influence upon, those under their charge (vv 13-15). Fourth is their preoccupation with the minutia of the law to the neglect of its weightier matters (vv 16-24). Fifth is their responsibility for the dreadful judgment that the whole nation is about to experience (vv 33-39).<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the End (24:1–25:46)<\/h5>\n<p>The introduction to this, the fifth and last of Matthew’s great discourses, makes it plain that there is the closest connection (for both Jesus and his disciples) between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age (24:1-3). Jesus first characterizes the time between his first advent and his return: there will be natural catastrophes, international warfare, the rise of false messiahs, the persecution of God’s people, and the universal proclamation of the gospel of the kingdom (vv 4-14). Then Jesus speaks of the catastrophe that is soon to befall the Jewish nation in particular (as already foretold in 22:7; 23:38), culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (24:15-25). Sometime thereafter (but after an interval known only to God the Father—v 36), the Son of Man will return in great glory, amid apocalyptic signs, to gather his people (vv 26-31). The present generation will not pass away before judgment falls upon Israel (vv 15-25), so let listeners take heed (vv 32-35). The same warning applies to the more remote coming of the Son of Man (vv 36-51): both the certainty of the event and the uncertainty of its time call for vigilance and faithfulness in the interval, for that event will bring both salvation and judgment. To drive the lesson home, Jesus tells the parables of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13) and the talents (vv 14-30). The concluding parable of the sheep and the goats (vv 31-46) speaks of the urgent necessity of making the right response to the “brothers”—that is, the messengers—of Christ; those who feed, clothe, and otherwise care for the messengers of Christ thereby testify to their reception of the apostles’ message and their Lord (cf. 10:40-42).<\/p>\n<h5>The Road to Golgotha (26:1–27:26)<\/h5>\n<p>As though in response to Jesus’ own prediction, the chief priests and the elders hatch their murderous plot (26:1-5), soon to be aided by Judas (vv 14-16). The anointing at Bethany (vv 6-13) testifies to the extravagance of love and the imminence of death. At the Passover meal (vv 17-30), signaling at what sacrifice the new exodus comes about (cf. 2:15), Jesus interprets his forthcoming death as an atoning sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins (26:26-28; cf. 1:21) and anticipates the day of final victory over sin and death in the consummated kingdom (26:29). Jesus’ agony in Gethsemane (vv 36-46) expresses his horror over taking his people’s sins upon himself. By a stupendous act of filial obedience, he submits his will to the Father, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (26:54; cf. Is 53). As the servant of God destined to suffer, Jesus resists attempts to thwart his arrest (26:47-56). The Jews’ supreme court (the Sanhedrin) and their loftiest religious official (the high priest) condemn Jesus as a blasphemer because he dares to identify himself as “the Christ, the Son of God” (26:57-68; cf. 16:16). As though joining the court’s repudiation, Peter—in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy (26:31-35)—disclaims knowledge of Jesus (vv 69-75). Judas’s disillusionment finds expression in suicide (27:3-10). The Jews hand Jesus over to Pilate the Roman governor (vv 1-2), he alone having the authority to pronounce the death sentence. Knowing that the charge of blasphemy will carry no weight with Pilate, the Jews now represent Jesus as a threat to Caesar. In the end, Pilate responds not to specific charges and evidence but to pressure from the crowd and the threat of riot (vv 11-25). He releases Barabbas and delivers Jesus to be crucified (v 26).<\/p>\n<h5>The Death of Jesus (27:27-66)<\/h5>\n<p>Following his humiliating treatment at the hands of the Roman soldiers, Jesus is led to the place of execution; weakened by the beatings, he requires assistance (27:27-32). He refuses the proffered narcotic so that he might keep his head clear (v 34). His being executed with malefactors (v 38) testifies to the purpose of his death (cf. 1:21). A steady stream of abuse is hurled at him, in blasphemous disregard of the truth of the superscription “This is Jesus the King of the Jews” (27:37-44). Finally, out of the darkness Jesus utters the cry of dereliction; now is revealed the ultimate horror (that from which his soul shrank in Gethsemane), the sin-bearer’s supreme agony—the beloved Son’s abandonment by the Father (vv 45-49). Having cried out with a loud voice (cf. Jn 19:30), Jesus dies (27:50). Immediately, the saving effects of his death become evident (vv 51-53): sinners, now forgiven, have access to the holy God (the veil of the temple is rent asunder), and there is hope of resurrection for those who have died. As at the beginning (2:1-12), Gentiles instead of Jews confess Jesus (27:54; contrast 26:63-65). Joseph’s careful attentiveness to Jesus’ burial contrasts with the ongoing attempts of the chief priests and Pharisees to resist Jesus’ power (27:57-66).<\/p>\n<h5>The Triumph of the Savior (28:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Amid great glory and power and joy, the Savior’s victory over death is announced and attested (28:1-7). The risen Jesus appears first to the women who stayed with him during his crucifixion (28:8-10; cf. 27:61; 28:1). The Jews’ response to the guards’ report signals their growing desperation before irresistible reality (28:11-15). Meeting with the 11 disciples on the mountain in Galilee (vv 16-20), Jesus, the new Moses, continues his instructions. He now reveals the evangelistic purpose for which Matthew has been preparing readers from the very threshold of his Gospel. The apostles are to disciple all peoples by baptizing them into the name of the triune God and by teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded. The apostles go forth in the assurance that Jesus—as the Lord—stands over them, and that Jesus—as Immanuel—stands with them until the very end of the age.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Luke, Gospel of; Mark, Gospel of; Matthew (Person); Synoptic Gospels.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","summary_en":"MATTHEW, Gospel of First Gospel and first book of the NT. Preview • Author • Date and Provenance • Purpose • Content Author Nowhere does the text of Matthew itself clearly identify the author. Yet, as did the ancient church, we may ascribe authorship to Matthew the apostle. He was otherwise known as Levi (see Mk 2:14; Lk 5:27, 29). Before Jesus called him, he was a tax collector (Mt 9:9ff.). It is interesting to note that Matthew called himself a tax collector, while none of the other Gospel ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":25456,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Messiah","title_en":"Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MESSIAH<\/h3>\n<p>Title derived from the Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiach<\/span><em>,<\/em> a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashach<\/span><em>)<\/em> conveys this idea as well.<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). While there is evidence for a literal anointing of prophets (1 Kgs 19:16), this does not appear to have been a standard practice. The anointing of Saul and David by Samuel established the act as a significant prerequisite for Hebrew kings before they assumed their positions of royal leadership. The king was especially considered to be the Lord’s anointed and as such was viewed to hold a secure position before men (1 Sm 12:14; 2 Sm 19:21) and God (Pss 2:2; 20:6). Along with numerous messianic prophecies, these proceedings helped inform the Jews of the Anointed One, par excellence, who would eventually come to bring salvation to Israel.<\/p>\n<p>Concluding the 13 articles of Hebraic faith attributed to Moses Maimonides (13th century <span>AD<\/span>) is the statement still found in many Hebrew prayer books: “I believe with a perfect heart that the Messiah will come; and although his coming be delayed, I will still wait patiently for his speedy appearance.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheOldTestament\">Messiah in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Jewish hope for the advent of the Messiah developed dynamically from the period of David’s reign, when it was prophesied that his kingdom would endure to the end of time (2 Sm 7:16). Israel was told that, through David’s descendants, his throne would exert a never-ending dominion over all the earth (2 Sm 22:48-51; Jer 33). It is with this aspect of messianic salvation that Jewish minds have traditionally been preoccupied (cf. Acts 1:6).<\/p>\n<p>Among Orthodox rabbis there has never been a lack of conjecture respecting the details of the Messiah’s ministry. At one time the rabbis applied no less than 456 passages of Scripture to his person and salvation. Preoccupation with the Messiah is evident in the tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> (Babylonian Talmud), where passages state that the world was created for him and that all the prophets prophesied of his days (<em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, 99a). By and large, Orthodoxy still retains its time-worn belief in the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the temple, and the reestablishment of both priesthood and sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>While later Judaism looked for the Messiah as an eschatological figure who will reign at the end of time, modern Jewish thought has largely jettisoned the traditional notion of a personal Messiah in favor of belief in a messianic age. Prevalent liberal Judaism envisions the world ultimately perfected through the influence of the twin Judaic ideals of justice and compassion. Such conviction, ignoring the plight of fallen humans and the teaching of Scripture, substitutes humanistic thinking for miraculous heavenly intervention.<\/p>\n<p>While the Messiah’s origin is linked firmly to the house of David (2 Sm 7:14; Hos 3:5), the promise for a Messiah was given long before David lived. In fact, the hope for the Messiah is implicit in the first promise of the establishment of the kingdom of God. Addressed to Satan, Genesis 3:15 declares that God will place hostility between the serpent and the woman until, in the fullness of time, the “seed” of the woman inflicts a fatal blow to the head of the serpent.<\/p>\n<p>The nature of messianic prophecy is progressive; each prophecy casts more light on the subject. This occurs, for example, respecting the concept of the “seed”: Messiah is to be born of a woman (Gn 3:15), through the line of Shem (9:26) and specifically through Abraham (22:18). Yet even as late as Genesis 22:18, the “seed” is not clearly presented as a person, since <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">zerah<\/span> (seed) may indicate a singular or plural object. Still less apparent in these early stages of messianic prophecy is the nature of the “bruising” that is to occur. Yet the idea of the Messiah being crushed for sin is implicit in the Genesis pronouncement, as is the violence associated with that act. Chief among the messianic prophets, Isaiah gives full range to the axiom that the Anointed One must endure extensive suffering (Is 53:1). Under the figure “the Servant of the Lord,” four “servant songs” delineate the mission of the future deliverer (Is 42:1-7; 49:1-9; 50:4-11; 52:13–53:12). While it is true that Isaiah does not explicitly link the title Messiah with the Servant of the Lord, identifying both figures as one and the same person is justifiable. Both figures are uniquely anointed (61:1); each brings light to the Gentiles (55:4; cf. 49:6); neither is pretentious in his first appearance (7:14-15; 11:1; cf. 42:3; 53:1); and the title of Davidic “branch” rests upon them both (11:1-4). Equally significant are the dual facts of their humiliation and exaltation (49:7; 52:13-15). Jewish scholars of the early Christian era in the Aramaic Targum on the prophets paraphrase Isaiah 42:1, “Behold my Servant Messiah” and begin Isaiah 53, “Behold my Servant Messiah will prosper.” While Cyrus may be spoken of as “anointed,” no final salvific work is attributed to him (45:1-5). Israel, although elect and loved by God (41:8), is ill-equipped as God’s servant to bring his redeeming work to mankind (42:18). The collapse of David’s dynasty points eloquently to Israel’s need for an anointed monarch who will heal the apostasy and disobedience (Ex 33:5; Hos 4:1). More and more, OT history presents Israel’s comprehensive moral failure. Her problem, which she shares with mankind, can only be solved by the making of a covenant whose surety and focal point is both a personal Savior and sovereign Lord (Jer 31:31-34). The advent of such a champion lives in the recorded promise of a shoot from the stump of Jesse’s fallen tree, who will bring the light of life to God’s benighted people (Is 9:2; 11:1).<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to get away from the idea that the concept of servanthood and lowliness belongs within the sphere of royalty (Zec 9:9). The concept of the Messiah filling the complementary offices of priest and king is incontrovertible (Ps 110:1-4); a suffering priest-king is far less obvious. Some among the Talmudic writers apparently recognized the likelihood that the Messiah would have to suffer. In the Babylonian Talmud, tractate <em>Sanhedrin<\/em> 98b, the Messiah is said to bear sicknesses and pain. Among the prayers for the Day of Atonement may be found the words of Eleazar ben Qalir (perhaps as late as <span>AD<\/span> 1000): “Our righteous Messiah has departed from us; we are horror-stricken, and there is none to justify us. Our iniquities and the yoke of our transgressions he carries, and is wounded for our transgressions. He bears on his shoulders our sins to find pardon for our iniquities. May we be healed by his stripes.” In a similar vein Rabbi Eliyya de Vidas writes, “The meaning of ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities,’ is that since the Messiah bears our iniquities, which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whosoever will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities must endure and suffer for them himself.” For all this, it is highly doubtful that anyone imagined the Messiah would accomplish his salvational work by means of his own death (cf. Is 53:12). When rabbinic speculation failed to satisfactorily harmonize the paradoxical facts of humiliation and exaltation, some hypothesized that God would send a Messiah to suffer as well as a Messiah to reign. Biblically, it is evident that the Anointed One’s terrible ordeal of suffering is but the necessary prelude to infinite glory. He is pictured not only as a great king (52:13; 53:12) but also as humble (53:2), humiliated (52:14), rejected (53:3), and bearing the consequences of mankind’s rebellion (vv 5-6). Yet he is raised up to intercede for, and richly bless, his people (v 12). The Messiah, having accomplished that full obedience that Adam and Israel failed to achieve, will bring Israel and the nations back to God (42:18-19; 49:3, 6).<\/p>\n<p>The writings of Daniel contain important messianic data. Daniel is unique in that he boldly speaks of “Messiah the Prince” (Dn 9:25), identifies him as the “Son of Man” (7:13), and says he suffers (“cut off,” 9:26). This statement of the cutting off (i.e., death) of the Messiah makes possible his work of atonement (9:24). The doctrine of a vicarious substitutionary atonement is the only doctrine of atonement found in the Bible (cf. Lv 17:11). Israel understood that to bear sin meant enduring the consequences, or penalty, for sin (cf. Nm 14:33). The same penal substitution is evident in the working principle of the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice. He is the victim’s substitute to whom is transferred the suffering due the sinner. The penalty having been thus borne vicariously, the suppliant is fully pardoned.<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 22:1 records the plaintive cry of the Messiah bearing man’s penalty for sin (cf. Mt 27:46) as he becomes sin on behalf of his people (2 Cor 5:21). Yet his cry, “My God,” indicates an intimate relationship that cannot be radically severed. Once again the motif of messianic humiliation prior to great exaltation is in view (Ps 22:27). In the so-called “royal psalms” (e.g., 2; 72; 110) it is the priestly intercessor who is also ordained to function as monarch and judge.<\/p>\n<p>Jeremiah brings the portrait a step further. The one who will enable humans to enter into a salvational covenant with God conveys God’s imputed righteousness: the Messiah, God’s righteous branch, becomes “the Lord our Righteousness.” Paradoxically, under the law no one could be crucified who was not guilty of sin (Dt 21:22). But it is Christ the righteous one who was crucified, thereby forever undermining any supposed legalistic confidence (Dt 21:23; Gal 3:13). More than forgiven, believers are deemed righteous in him (Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>While the birthplace of the Messiah was well established (Mi 5:2), his deity was a hotly contested matter. Although few in ancient Israel disputed the belief in a superhuman Messiah, it is doubtful that anyone imagined him to be “God with us” in the fullest sense of the expression (cf. Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MessiahintheNewTestament\">Messiah in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT writers present the picture that he who was the child of supernatural origins (Is 7:14; Mi 5:2) carried the full weight of divinity (Is 9:6; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19). He is the Son of God, worthy to receive the worship of all people (Ps 45:6-7; cf. Heb 1:8-9).<\/p>\n<p>The Jews of first-century Palestine knew that the messianic promise would be fulfilled in the coming of one like Moses (Dt 18:18). Parallels between Jesus and Moses are abundant. As mediators, innovators, and propagators of new phases of spiritual life for the people, they are unexcelled. Specifically, both are miraculously spared in infancy (Ex 2; Mt 2:13-23); both renounce a royal court for the sake of serving the people of God (Phil 2:5-8; Heb 11:24-28); both exhibit intense compassion for others (Nm 27:17; Mt 9:36); both commune “face to face” with God (Ex 34:29-30; 2 Cor 3:7); and each mediates a covenant of redemption (Dt 29:1; Heb 8:6-7). But, as Luther observes, “Christ is no Moses.” In the final analysis Moses is but a household servant; the Messiah is the maker and master of all things (Heb 3:3-6; cf. Jn 1:1-2, 18).<\/p>\n<p>Family genealogies are important in Scripture. Rabbis agreed upon the absolute necessity of the Messiah’s Davidic lineage based on Hosea 3:5 and Jeremiah 30:9. The angelic announcement immediately establishes the correct lineage for Jesus (Lk 1:32-33; cf. 2:4), as does Matthew’s (Mt 1:1-17). The Lukan list, like that of Matthew, sets forth the exclusive kingly descent verifying Jesus as Messiah (Lk 3:23-38). Although variations occur between the two genealogies, there is a firm solidarity emphasizing an ancestry within the unique messianic stock. Fully aware of the messianic focus of Scripture (Jn 5:46; 8:56), Jesus acknowledged himself to be the Christ on numerous occasions. He accepted the title from blind Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-48); from the crowds when he entered Jerusalem (Mt 21:9); from the children at the temple (v 15); and in other contexts as well (Mt 16:16-18; Mk 14:61-62; Lk 4:21; Jn 4:25-26). Nonetheless, he warned his disciples not to broadcast his mighty acts as Messiah prior to his resurrection (Mt 17:9; cf. Lk 9:20-21). Owing to the commonly held (but false) notion that the Messiah’s role was primarily that of a political liberator, Jesus actually avoided use of that term and preferred to identify himself as “the Son of Man.” It was by no means assumed that both designations referred to the same person (cf. Mk 14:61-62). Borrowing essentially from Daniel’s vision of a heavenly conqueror (Dn 7:13-14), Jesus consistently employed this less-known title and filled it with the true character and scope of messianic salvation. Jesus’ teaching in this regard enabled his disciples to correct their erroneous views concerning his mission (Mt 16:21-23). In the fullness of time they would come to see him not only as Messiah but also as the theme of the entire OT (Mt 5:17; Lk 24:27, 44; Jn 5:39; cf. Heb 10:7). When Jesus expounded the Scriptures beginning with the Torah (Lk 24:27), he did so as the living exegesis of God, the Word made flesh (Jn 1:14, 18). Legitimate messianic exposition is found in a host of texts, such as Psalms 2; 16; 22; 40; 110; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 11:1; 40:10-11; 50:6; 52:13–53:12; 61:1; 63:1-6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:23; 37:25; Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 11:1; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 9:9; 11:13; 12:10; 13:7; Malachi 3:1; 4:2.<\/p>\n<p>The messiahship of Jesus is firmly proclaimed by all four evangelists (Mt 1:1; Mk 1:1; Lk 24:26; Jn 20:31). Peter on Pentecost, Philip before the Ethiopian eunuch, and Apollos in open debate all argue convincingly that Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 2:36; 8:35; 28:28). Peter says he was “made” both Lord and Christ (2:36), signifying that the resurrection rightfully confirms him as such. Similarly, the apostle Paul speaks of Jesus’ resurrection as a patent declaration of his inalienable right to the title (Rom 1:4). For the ex-Pharisee and former persecutor of the church, “Jesus the Christ” is the very heart and soul of Paul’s preaching. Nothing is worthy to be compared to the glory of the Messiah; everything pales by comparison (Phil 3:5-10). The apostle’s all-consuming passion is for others to know the fullness of God in the person of his only Son (Eph 3:14-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Holy Spirit in Scripture speaks of Jesus with wide-ranging appellatives—Holy One, Judge, Righteous One, King, Son of God, and Lord—but these are not exhaustive. In him all the lines of messianic prediction converge; he is the touchstone whereby their validity is firmly established. The Lord Jesus Christ is himself the heart and substance of that covenant through which sinful people may be reconciled to a holy God (Is 42:6; Jn 14:6). That Jesus is the Messiah of Israel, God incarnate, exhaustively fulfills prophecy, type, and symbol—all shadows of his coming. Therefore, all should trust in him, the source of all grace, the only abiding treasure (Mt 12:21; Jn 1:16-17; Col 2:3). Anointed as prophet, he leads us into all truth (Jn 6:14; 7:16); as priest he intercedes for us (Heb 7:21); and as king he reigns over us (Phil 2:9-10).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Branch; Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Redeemer, Redemption; Son of God; Son of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","summary_en":"MESSIAH Title derived from the Hebrew, mashiach, a verbal adjective meaning “anointed one.” Along with its NT equivalent, christos (Christ), it refers to an act of consecration whereby an individual is set apart to serve God and then anointed with oil. The verbal root (mashach) conveys this idea as well. Israel’s practice of ceremonially anointing with oil is present in several contexts. Priests were regularly anointed prior to their divinely given service at the altar of sacrifice (Lv 4:3). ...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29704,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","summary_en":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54819,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","summary_en":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54820,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","summary_en":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82445,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","summary_en":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82446,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","summary_en":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110071,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","summary_en":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110072,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","summary_en":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137697,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21-28<\/strong> Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","summary_en":"16:21-28 Jesus, now officially recognized by his disciples as the Messiah, begins to reveal a startling aspect of his mission: He must suffer before entering his glory (16:21-23), and those who follow him will meet a similar fate (16:24-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137698,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:21<\/strong> This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ <em>passion<\/em>—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That <em>he would suffer<\/em> was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","summary_en":"16:21 This is the first of three predictions of Jesus’ passion—his suffering through betrayal, crucifixion, and death (see also 17:22-23; 20:18-19). Each prediction gives a lesson on the cost of discipleship (16:24-27; 20:20-28). • That he would suffer was God’s sovereign and necessary purpose for the Messiah (see 17:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65093,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65149,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65245,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67120,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92719,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92775,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92871,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94746,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120345,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120401,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120497,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122372,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147971,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148027,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148123,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149998,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead","title_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of the Dead<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp. Heb 12:2). They expected Jesus to return and resurrect their bodies, and they looked forward to living with him forever (1 Pet 1:3-6, 23). Their faith was based on the foundation of Jesus’ own bodily resurrection (1 Cor 15:12-20; Acts 4:33; see also 2 Cor 4:14).<\/p>\n<p>Resurrection bodies will be fundamentally different from the bodies we experience in this life, with all of their limitations and failings. These renewed bodies will be glorious, strong, immortal, and spiritual, like Christ’s own resurrection body (1 Cor 15:35-58).<\/p>\n<p>Because they are already joined to Christ, believers actually begin to experience resurrection existence here and now. They have already been “raised” with Christ; they have already been given “resurrection life” (Rom 6:4-11; 8:10-11; Col 2:12). As a result, their lives are now centered in the spiritual realities of heaven rather than in worldly things (Col 3:1-4). Believers can experience the transforming power of that new life here and now, the new life of the Spirit that frees them from the power of sin and death (Rom 8:1-4). In all the difficulties they face, their trust is not in themselves but in the resurrection power of God (2 Cor 1:9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Dan 12:2-3; Matt 16:21; 28:1-10; Mark 12:18-27; John 3:13-16; 5:25-30; 6:39-40; 11:21-27; Acts 2:23-24; 3:14-15; 4:33; 10:39-41; 17:2-3; 24:15; 26:22-23; Rom 1:4; 4:25; 6:4-11; 8:10-11; 1 Cor 15:12-58; 2 Cor 1:8-9; 4:13-18; 5:1-10; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 3:1-4; 1 Thes 4:13-18; 1 Pet 1:3-6, 23; Rev 20:11-15; 21:1-7; 22:1-6<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","summary_en":"The Resurrection of the Dead Jesus spoke of a future resurrection of all people—either to eternal life or to judgment (Mark 12:26-27; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26; cp. Luke 20:34-36). When Christ returns, all his people will be resurrected to be with him forever (1 Thes 4:13-18; cp. 2 Cor 5:1-10). This strong hope characterized the outlook of the early Christians. They were able to endure their suffering because their eyes were fixed on what lay beyond this life (2 Cor 4:16-18; cp....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":42159,"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":69785,"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":97411,"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":125037,"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":54821,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","summary_en":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82447,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","summary_en":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110073,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","summary_en":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137699,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:22<\/strong> <em>began to reprimand him:<\/em> Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","summary_en":"16:22 began to reprimand him: Though Peter accurately perceived Jesus’ identity as God’s Messiah, he did not understand that the Messiah must suffer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":41849,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69475,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97101,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":124727,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"Satan","title_en":"Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Satan<\/h3>\n<p>The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">satan<\/span> is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Testament that Satan became identified with the serpent in Eden (see <em>Wisdom of Solomon<\/em> 2:24). The New Testament refers to the chief demon as “(the) Satan” (Rev 20:2), along with numerous other names such as the devil (Matt 4:1-11), the tempter (1 Thes 3:5), Beelzeboul, the ruler of demons (see textual notes at Matt 12:24; Luke 11:15), the evil one (Matt 13:19, 38; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18), Beliar (see textual note at 2 Cor 6:15), the deceiver (Rev 12:9), the great seven-headed dragon and serpent of old (Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2), a murderer, and the father of lies (John 8:44).<\/p>\n<p>Satan incited David’s census (1 Chr 21:1; cp. 2 Sam 24:1), tempted and betrayed Jesus (Mark 1:12-13; John 13:27), desired to test Peter as he had tested Job (Luke 22:31), enslaved sinners (Acts 26:17-18), and deceitfully opposed God’s people (1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 11:14). The adversary of God’s people will be overcome in the end, when God defeats and imprisons him (Rev 12:9; 20:2, 10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 22:22, 32; 1 Chr 21:1; Job 1:6–2:7; Zech 3:1-4; Matt 4:1-10; 12:24; 13:19, 38-39; 16:23; Mark 1:13; 4:15; Luke 4:6; 10:17-20; 11:15; 22:3, 31; John 8:44; 12:31; 13:2, 27; 16:11; Acts 13:9-10; 26:17-18; Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 2:10-11; 4:4; 6:15; 11:13-15; 1 Thes 3:5; 2 Thes 2:2-12; Heb 2:14; Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:8; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18; Rev 12:3, 9; 20:2, 10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","summary_en":"Satan The book of Job includes “the satan” among the heavenly court (Job 1:6; 2:1). The Hebrew word satan refers to an adversary or an accuser in court (see Job 1–2; Zech 3:1). God sometimes appoints angels as adversaries for righteous judgment and opposition to evildoers (e.g., Num 22:22, 32, where the term satan is often translated “block”; see also 1 Kgs 22:19-23). The Old Testament hints at the accuser’s demonic character, but it was between the times of the Old Testament and the New Test...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54822,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","summary_en":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82448,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","summary_en":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110074,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","summary_en":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137700,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:23<\/strong> As when <em>Satan<\/em> tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • <em>dangerous trap:<\/em> Literally <em>stumbling block<\/em>.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","summary_en":"16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65068,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92694,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120320,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147946,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Jesus and Satan","title_en":"Jesus and Satan","content_ro":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Jesus and Satan<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning <em>Adversary;<\/em> 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10:1, 7-8; 12:22-29; Mark 5:1-20). Matthew records that Satan has power over kingdoms (4:8-9; 12:26) and that he has angels at his command (see footnote on 25:41). Satan’s primary tool is temptation, and his goal is to generate disobedience to God (Matt 4:1-11; 6:13; 16:23). Since Christ is the agent of God for the salvation of human beings, Satan fervently attacked Christ (Matt 4:1-11; John 13:27). But Christ has defeated him and will eventually strip Satan of all his powers (Matt 25:41; John 12:31; Rev 20:1-10).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; Matt 4:1-11; 13:19; 16:23; Luke 10:17-20; 13:16; 22:3, 31-32; John 12:31; 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:17-18; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:13-14; 1 Tim 2:14; 5:15; Rev 12:9; 20:1-10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","summary_en":"Jesus and Satan Jesus was opposed by a personal agent of sin and evil (Matt 4:1-11). In Matthew, he is called “Satan” (meaning Adversary; 4:10), the “devil” (4:1-11; 13:39), the “tempter” (see footnote on 4:3), the “prince of demons” (9:34), “Beelzeboul” (see footnote on 12:24), the “evil one” (6:13; 13:19), and “the enemy” (13:39). Jesus’ mission of announcing and bringing in the Kingdom of God inevitably led to conflict with Satan’s forces, including exorcisms (see Matt 8:16-17; 9:32-34; 10...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":8255,"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":54823,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","summary_en":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82449,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","summary_en":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110075,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","summary_en":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137701,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:24<\/strong> <em>give . . . take . . . follow:<\/em> These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • <em>Take up your cross<\/em> is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Matthew, <em>follow<\/em> is used both literally (9:19; 26:58) and metaphorically. Metaphorically, it indicates interest in a teacher (4:25; 8:1, 10; 12:15; 14:13; 19:2; 20:29; 21:9) or personal allegiance to Jesus involving a call, a commitment, and great ongoing costs (4:20, 22; 8:19, 22-23; 9:9; 10:38; 16:24; 19:21, 27).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","summary_en":"16:24 give . . . take . . . follow: These three imperatives use different images to speak of the same radical commitment of confessing one’s sinfulness before God in humility, surrendering one’s personal ambition to God, and living according to his will (see also 5:20; 10:34-39; 18:1-5; 20:20-28). • Take up your cross is a metaphor for devotion (see Luke 9:23) rather than a call to martyrdom, although martyrdom is an ever-present possibility for Jesus’ disciples (Matt 5:10-12; 10:21). • In Ma...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65955,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66994,"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":93581,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94620,"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":121207,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122246,"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":148833,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","title_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship","content_ro":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John’s Profile of Discipleship<\/h3>\n<p>In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>What is the profile of a disciple? (1) <em>Disciples know who Jesus is.<\/em> In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) <em>Disciples believe in Jesus.<\/em> They see Jesus’ mighty works, listen to his profound words, and believe (see 1:49; 4:39-42; 9:35-38; see also 20:8, 24-29). (3) <em>Jesus’ disciples understand that they must follow him if their discipleship is to be successful<\/em> (1:37-43; 8:12; 10:4-5, 27; 12:26; 21:19-22). Following implies genuine devotion, leaving what we have to embrace the journey with Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>John provided this profile of true discipleship because he wanted his readers to join these courageous men and women and become disciples of Jesus as well (see 20:30-31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 9:9-10; 10:16-22; 16:24-28; Luke 14:26-33; John 8:31-32; 9:1-41; 12:25-26; 13:35; 18:36; Acts 9:2; Rom 15:5; 1 Cor 3:4-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","summary_en":"John’s Profile of Discipleship In the first half of his Gospel, John tells about a variety of people who model true discipleship (see John 1:19-51; 4:1-42; 9:1-41). Through them John provides a profile of the mature follower, or “disciple,” of Christ. What is the profile of a disciple? (1) Disciples know who Jesus is. In each of these three accounts, Jesus is identified correctly (see, e.g., 1:34, 36, 38, 41; 4:19, 29, 31; 9:2, 17, 35-38). (2) Disciples believe in Jesus. They see Jesus’ might...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149872,"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}],"25":[{"id":54824,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","summary_en":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82450,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","summary_en":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110076,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","summary_en":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137702,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:25<\/strong> Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","summary_en":"16:25 Jesus’ disciples must relinquish control of their lives, even to the point of being willing to suffer and die for Christ. Jesus promised that those who follow him with such radical abandon, though they may suffer now, will be vindicated at the final judgment (see 1 Pet 2:23).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":19675,"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":23199,"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":33097,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Riches","title_en":"Riches","content_ro":"<h3>RICHES<\/h3>\n<p>Wealth measured by money or the amount of property owned, whether land and buildings (Is 5:8-10), livestock (1 Sm 25:2-3), or slaves (8:11-18). Great riches brought great influence and power, as the Hebrew word for wealth implies.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible seems to speak with two voices on the subject of riches, sometimes describing material wealth as a sign of God’s blessing and approval (e.g., Gn 24:35), at other times virtually identifying the rich with the wicked (e.g., Ps 37:7, 16).<\/p>\n<p>God made all things for people to enjoy (1 Tm 6:17). That is why being rich is a matter for thanksgiving, not embarrassment. Every possession that a person can possibly own comes from the Creator (Ps 24:1), so all wealth can rightly be counted as a blessing from God. It was in this spirit that David could pray to God, “Riches and honour come of thee” (1 Chr 29:12, <span>kjv<\/span>). Even when wealth is earned by hard work, the Bible reminds its readers that both their talents and their resources are God-given. Jesus illustrates this important lesson in the parables of the 10 talents (Mt 25:14-30) and the 10 minas (Lk 19:11-26).<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere, then, does the Bible say that having possessions and becoming wealthy are wrong in themselves. There would be no point in the Ten Commandments’ ban on stealing and envy if it was wrong for God’s people to own anything at all. Jesus himself never taught that it was sinful to be rich.<\/p>\n<p>However, Jesus warned that riches could keep a person out of the kingdom: “How hard it is for rich people to get into the Kingdom of God!” (Mk 10:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). Affluence, he taught, can destroy peace (Mt 6:24-34), blind people to the needs of others (Lk 16:19-31), stand between individuals and the gateway to eternal life (Mk 10:17-27), and even bring God’s judgment (Lk 12:16-21). He told his disciples not to accumulate personal wealth (Mt 6:19), and he praised those who gave up their possessions (19:29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ warnings against wealth are not, in fact, directed against riches in themselves. What he condemns is the wrong attitudes many people have toward acquiring wealth, and the wrong ways in which they use it. Longing for riches, not having them, chokes the spiritual life like weeds in a field of grain (Mt 13:22). The greedy desire to have more wealth doomed the unforgiving servant (18:23-35). And the rich man’s selfishness, not his wealth, sealed his fate (Lk 16:19-26). Paul captured the main theme in these parables when he said, “The <em>love<\/em> of money is at the root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tm 6:10, <span>nlt<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<p>The greatest danger of all arises when riches gain the mastery in a person’s life. The whole Bible warns against this idolatrous attitude to material things (e.g., Dt 8:17-18; Lk 14:15-24). Satan tempted Jesus to put material wealth and power in God’s place (Mt 4:8-9), and Jesus delivers the clearest warning against making money one’s master (6:24). In this light Jesus instructs the rich young ruler to sell everything (Mk 10:17-22). Here was a wealthy man who had allowed his possessions to possess him. Jesus’ aim was to make him recognize his bondage so he could escape from his self-made prison. The fact that he turned away from Jesus demonstrates the powerful pull of riches.<\/p>\n<p>These blunt warnings are the most striking aspect of Jesus’ teaching on wealth. But alongside his exposure of wrong attitudes he was careful to sketch in the outline of right attitudes. Those who recognize that they are God’s trustees (not owners) of their possessions, he taught, will find many valuable outlets for their riches in the Lord’s service (Lk 12:42-44). Instead of making them tight-fisted, their riches should allow them to express love in many practical ways (2 Cor 8:2). And instead of having their inward peace ruined by anxious greed, they would find the secret of serenity in an increasing sense of dependence on their heavenly Giver (Lk 12:29-31; 1 Tm 6:17).<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, then, the morality of riches depends entirely on personal attitudes. And nowhere does this come out more than in the frequent comparisons Scripture draws between material and spiritual wealth. Those who make material riches their goal in life have wrong values. However wealthy they may appear, they are poverty-stricken in God’s sight (Mt 16:26; Rv 3:17). In his view, the truly rich are those whose main aim in life is to serve him as King (Mt 13:44-46). Their wealth lies in the currency of faith and good works (1 Tm 6:18; Jas 2:5)—a heavenly bank balance that no one can steal and nothing can erode: “Wherever your treasure is, there your heart and thoughts will also be” (Mt 6:21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Poor, The; Wages; Wealth.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RICHES<\/h3>\n<p>Wealth measured by money or the amount of property owned, whether land and buildings (Is 5:8-10), livestock (1 Sm 25:2-3), or slaves (8:11-18). Great riches brought great influence and power, as the Hebrew word for wealth implies.<\/p>\n<p>The Bible seems to speak with two voices on the subject of riches, sometimes describing material wealth as a sign of God’s blessing and approval (e.g., Gn 24:35), at other times virtually identifying the rich with the wicked (e.g., Ps 37:7, 16).<\/p>\n<p>God made all things for people to enjoy (1 Tm 6:17). That is why being rich is a matter for thanksgiving, not embarrassment. Every possession that a person can possibly own comes from the Creator (Ps 24:1), so all wealth can rightly be counted as a blessing from God. It was in this spirit that David could pray to God, “Riches and honour come of thee” (1 Chr 29:12, <span>kjv<\/span>). Even when wealth is earned by hard work, the Bible reminds its readers that both their talents and their resources are God-given. Jesus illustrates this important lesson in the parables of the 10 talents (Mt 25:14-30) and the 10 minas (Lk 19:11-26).<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere, then, does the Bible say that having possessions and becoming wealthy are wrong in themselves. There would be no point in the Ten Commandments’ ban on stealing and envy if it was wrong for God’s people to own anything at all. Jesus himself never taught that it was sinful to be rich.<\/p>\n<p>However, Jesus warned that riches could keep a person out of the kingdom: “How hard it is for rich people to get into the Kingdom of God!” (Mk 10:23, <span>nlt<\/span>). Affluence, he taught, can destroy peace (Mt 6:24-34), blind people to the needs of others (Lk 16:19-31), stand between individuals and the gateway to eternal life (Mk 10:17-27), and even bring God’s judgment (Lk 12:16-21). He told his disciples not to accumulate personal wealth (Mt 6:19), and he praised those who gave up their possessions (19:29).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ warnings against wealth are not, in fact, directed against riches in themselves. What he condemns is the wrong attitudes many people have toward acquiring wealth, and the wrong ways in which they use it. Longing for riches, not having them, chokes the spiritual life like weeds in a field of grain (Mt 13:22). The greedy desire to have more wealth doomed the unforgiving servant (18:23-35). And the rich man’s selfishness, not his wealth, sealed his fate (Lk 16:19-26). Paul captured the main theme in these parables when he said, “The <em>love<\/em> of money is at the root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tm 6:10, <span>nlt<\/span>, emphasis added).<\/p>\n<p>The greatest danger of all arises when riches gain the mastery in a person’s life. The whole Bible warns against this idolatrous attitude to material things (e.g., Dt 8:17-18; Lk 14:15-24). Satan tempted Jesus to put material wealth and power in God’s place (Mt 4:8-9), and Jesus delivers the clearest warning against making money one’s master (6:24). In this light Jesus instructs the rich young ruler to sell everything (Mk 10:17-22). Here was a wealthy man who had allowed his possessions to possess him. Jesus’ aim was to make him recognize his bondage so he could escape from his self-made prison. The fact that he turned away from Jesus demonstrates the powerful pull of riches.<\/p>\n<p>These blunt warnings are the most striking aspect of Jesus’ teaching on wealth. But alongside his exposure of wrong attitudes he was careful to sketch in the outline of right attitudes. Those who recognize that they are God’s trustees (not owners) of their possessions, he taught, will find many valuable outlets for their riches in the Lord’s service (Lk 12:42-44). Instead of making them tight-fisted, their riches should allow them to express love in many practical ways (2 Cor 8:2). And instead of having their inward peace ruined by anxious greed, they would find the secret of serenity in an increasing sense of dependence on their heavenly Giver (Lk 12:29-31; 1 Tm 6:17).<\/p>\n<p>According to the Bible, then, the morality of riches depends entirely on personal attitudes. And nowhere does this come out more than in the frequent comparisons Scripture draws between material and spiritual wealth. Those who make material riches their goal in life have wrong values. However wealthy they may appear, they are poverty-stricken in God’s sight (Mt 16:26; Rv 3:17). In his view, the truly rich are those whose main aim in life is to serve him as King (Mt 13:44-46). Their wealth lies in the currency of faith and good works (1 Tm 6:18; Jas 2:5)—a heavenly bank balance that no one can steal and nothing can erode: “Wherever your treasure is, there your heart and thoughts will also be” (Mt 6:21, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Poor, The; Wages; Wealth.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RICHES Wealth measured by money or the amount of property owned, whether land and buildings (Is 5:8-10), livestock (1 Sm 25:2-3), or slaves (8:11-18). Great riches brought great influence and power, as the Hebrew word for wealth implies. The Bible seems to speak with two voices on the subject of riches, sometimes describing material wealth as a sign of God’s blessing and approval (e.g., Gn 24:35), at other times virtually identifying the rich with the wicked (e.g., Ps 37:7, 16). God made all ...","summary_en":"RICHES Wealth measured by money or the amount of property owned, whether land and buildings (Is 5:8-10), livestock (1 Sm 25:2-3), or slaves (8:11-18). Great riches brought great influence and power, as the Hebrew word for wealth implies. The Bible seems to speak with two voices on the subject of riches, sometimes describing material wealth as a sign of God’s blessing and approval (e.g., Gn 24:35), at other times virtually identifying the rich with the wicked (e.g., Ps 37:7, 16). God made all ...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38676,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"World","title_en":"World","content_ro":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WORLD<\/h3>\n<p>An important NT term from the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">kosmos<\/span> (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings:<\/p>\n<p>1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24).<\/p>\n<li>2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46).<\/li>\n<li>3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13).<\/li>\n<li>4. The total of human existence in this present life, with all of its experience and possessions (Mt 16:26; 1 Cor 7:33).<\/li>\n<li>5. The world order as alienated from God, in rebellion against him, and condemned for its godlessness. It is “this world” (Jn 8:23; 12:25; 1 Cor 3:19), as opposed to “that which is to come.” The ruler of this world is the devil (Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Cor 5:10)—as John said it, “The whole world is under the control of the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19, <span>niv<\/span>). Christians are not of this world (Jn 15:19; 17:16), even though they live in the world and participate in its activities (17:11). The believer is regarded as dead to the world (Gal 6:14; cf. Col 3:2-3). The Christian is to be separated from the world (Jas 1:27).<\/li>\n<p>One’s relationship with the world is an indicator of one’s relationship with God. Those who love the world are void of love for God the Father (1 Jn 2:15). The Scripture points out that “all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world” (v 16, <span>rsv<\/span>). The world and its desires or lusts are transient, passing away, but the doer of God’s word abides forever (1 Jn 2:17; cf. 2 Cor 4:18). Friendship with the world is enmity toward God (Jas 4:4).<\/p>\n<p>The discourse of Jesus on the night before his crucifixion contains much teaching about the world. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth (Jn 14:17). Christ gives a peace that the world cannot give (v 27). Jesus offers love, while the world gives hatred and persecution (15:19-20). The world’s hatred of God is also directed against the followers of Christ (vv 18-21). Although the disciples of Jesus have tribulation “in this world,” they are to be of good cheer, for Jesus has overcome the world (16:33).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word sometimes translated “world” is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aion<\/span><em>,<\/em> which emphasizes the temporal aspect of the world. It is used of time without end, eternity (e.g., Rom 1:25; 2 Cor 11:31; Phil 4:20). <em>See<\/em> Age.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","summary_en":"WORLD An important NT term from the Greek word kosmos (meaning that which is ordered or arranged), having five different meanings: 1. The universe created by God with design and order (e.g., Mt 13:35; Jn 17:24; Acts 17:24). 2. The planet earth (e.g., Jn 11:9). This includes the idea of earth as the dwelling place of human beings (16:21) and of earth as contrasted with heaven (6:14; 12:46). 3. The total of humanity (Mt 5:14; Jn 3:16; 1 Cor 4:13). 4. The total of human existence in this present...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54825,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","summary_en":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82451,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","summary_en":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110077,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","summary_en":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137703,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:26<\/strong> <em>your own soul?<\/em> “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuchē<\/span>) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","summary_en":"16:26 your own soul? “Soul” and “life” (16:25) both translate the same Greek term (psuchē) and refer to the essence of a person—the self.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":14041,"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":19703,"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":31623,"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":35835,"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":54826,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","summary_en":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82452,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","summary_en":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110078,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","summary_en":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137704,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:27<\/strong> The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to <em>judge all people according to their deeds<\/em> (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","summary_en":"16:27 The exhortation to deny oneself and follow Jesus is rooted in the fact that Jesus will return to judge all people according to their deeds (see 19:28; 24:29-31; 25:31; Ps 62:12; Prov 24:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64949,"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":65194,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66660,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Angels","title_en":"Angels","content_ro":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","summary_en":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67603,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy","title_en":"Apostasy","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","summary_en":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67802,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92575,"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":92820,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94286,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Angels","title_en":"Angels","content_ro":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","summary_en":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95229,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy","title_en":"Apostasy","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","summary_en":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95428,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120201,"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":120446,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121912,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Angels","title_en":"Angels","content_ro":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","summary_en":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122855,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy","title_en":"Apostasy","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","summary_en":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123054,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147827,"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":148072,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds","title_en":"Faith and Good Deeds","content_ro":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Faith and Good Deeds<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consistent feature of Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Matt 7:13-27; 13:3-9, 18-23; 16:27). For Jesus, works are a sure indicator of faith, which begins with repentance—a conversion of the heart and mind that involves turning away from sin to God (Matt 4:17; see also 3:2, 8-10; 11:20-24; 12:38-42).<\/p>\n<p>A misapplication of the concept of salvation by grace alone has led to a false dichotomy between faith and works. Salvation is not achieved by works, but neither is it without works (see Gal 5:6, 21; Eph 2:10; 5:5; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:8). Jesus promises blessing and reward to those who live in accord with God’s will (Matt 5:3-12). Consequently, righteousness is required of those who want to enter the Kingdom (5:20-48; 7:21; 22:11-14; 23:3). Faith that does not result in works is not saving faith (Jas 2:14-26).<\/p>\n<p>James, in his conspicuous emphasis on faithfulness to God, argues for charitable deeds as an expression of faith (2:14-26). A faith relationship with God cannot be based merely on believing a true statement (2:19). Saving faith results in actions (1:22-25; 2:14). Faithful actions emulate God, who generously gives good gifts (1:5, 17; 4:6). Faith and good deeds are therefore inseparable. As with Abraham, good deeds show that a person has complete faith and is righteous before God (2:23; see Gen 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus taught and modeled faith that does good deeds (see Matt 5:13-16), and Paul also affirmed the need for good deeds (Rom 2:6; Gal 6:5-10; Eph 2:10; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thes 1:3). James points to some specific actions which demonstrate faith, including caring for orphans and widows (1:27), avoiding favoritism toward the rich (2:1-7), providing food and clothing for the poor (2:15-17), controlling one’s tongue (3:1-12), promoting peace (3:17-18), and refraining from judging others (4:11-12). All of these things can be understood as “faith expressing itself in love” (Gal 5:6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:1; 22:1-19; Lev 22:31; Hab 2:4; Matt 3:2, 8-10; 4:17; 5:3-12, 20-48; 7:13-27; 10:32-33; 11:20-24; 12:33-42; 13:3-9, 18-23; 15:15-20; 16:27; 25:31-46; John 15:2; Rom 2:6; Gal 5:6, 16-26; 6:5-10; Eph 2:8-10; 5:3-9; Phil 2:12-13; Heb 11:1-40; Jas 2:14-26; 1 Jn 1:5-10; Rev 21:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","summary_en":"Faith and Good Deeds Jesus did not teach salvation by works—he taught the necessity of a conversion (an internal reorientation toward God by an act of God’s grace), which results in a life of obedience. Good works are the natural consequence of a relationship with Jesus Christ (see, e.g., Matt 7:15-20; 12:33-37; 15:15-20). The parable of the sheep and the goats is an example of the indissoluble link between faith and works. The connection between faith, works, and final approval is a consiste...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149538,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Angels","title_en":"Angels","content_ro":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Angels<\/h3>\n<p>Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometimes administer his judgment (2 Kgs 19:35; Acts 12:23; Rev 9:15; 16:1-12). Angels were witnesses of Christ’s life (1 Tim 3:16), and they are now witnesses of the lives of God’s people (see 1 Cor 11:10; 1 Tim 5:21). There are guardian angels who protect God’s people (Matt 18:10; see also Pss 34:7; 91:11; Acts 12:11). They are “spirits sent to care for people who will inherit salvation” (Heb 1:14). Angels will accompany Christ when he returns (Matt 25:31; 2 Thes 1:7-8) and will participate in the final judgment (Matt 13:39, 41, 49-50; 16:27; 24:31; Mark 13:27; Luke 9:26; 12:8; 2 Thes 1:7).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appear at some significant points in the Gospels. Angels announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus (Luke 1:1–2:52) and ministered to Jesus after his temptation (Matt 4:11). Angels also appeared at the empty tomb after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 28:1-8; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:23; John 20:12).<\/p>\n<p>The ministry of angels is also prominent in the book of Acts. On multiple occasions, an angel of the Lord made possible miraculous escapes from prison (5:19; 12:6-11). An angel offered a message of encouragement to Paul in the midst of a violent storm (27:23-24). An angel also directed Cornelius to seek the Good News from Peter (10:3, 7, 22; 11:13). Meanwhile, an angel struck down Herod Agrippa “because he accepted the people’s worship instead of giving the glory to God” (12:23). Throughout Acts, God was guiding his people in their ministry and using angels to accomplish his purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Some angels have fallen into sin and are destined for eternal judgment (Matt 25:41; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6). And although angels are spiritual and heavenly beings, angels are not to be worshiped (Gal 1:8; Col 2:18; Rev 19:10; 22:8-9) because they are inferior to Christ (Heb 1:5-14). Their role is to be servants of God (Heb 1:14).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ps 91:11; Dan 8:15-18; 9:21-23; 10:4–11:1; 12:1-2; Zech 1:8-13, 18-19; 2:3-5; Matt 1:20-24; 4:5-7, 11; 13:39-42, 49-50; 18:10; 24:31; 28:2-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 1:11-22, 26-38; 2:8-15; 9:26; 12:8; John 20:12-13; Acts 5:19-20; 7:30-35, 53; 10:3-8; 12:6-11, 23; 27:23-24; 1 Cor 11:10; Gal 1:8; 3:19; Col 2:18; 1 Thes 4:16; 1 Tim 3:16; 5:21; Heb 1:5-14; 12:22; 13:2; 2 Pet 2:4, 11; Jude 1:6, 9; Rev 1:1-2; 5:2, 11-12; 7:1-2; 8:3-8; 9:15; 10:7-9; 14:6-10; 16:1-12; 19:10, 17; 20:1; 22:6-9<\/p>","summary_ro":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","summary_en":"Angels Throughout the Bible, angels are God’s heavenly agents who carry out his purpose and communicate God’s will to humanity (Gen 16:7-12; Num 22:22-34; Judg 13:3-21; 2 Kgs 1:3, 15; Zech 1:4-12). The only angels named in the Bible are Michael and Gabriel, who carry out special assignments (Dan 8:16, 18; 9:21; 10:12, 21; 12:1-2; Luke 1:19-20; Jude 1:9). Angels had a role in putting God’s law into effect through Moses (Acts 7:30, 35, 38, 53; Gal 3:19). Angels dispense God’s grace and sometime...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150481,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Apostasy","title_en":"Apostasy","content_ro":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Apostasy<\/h3>\n<p>Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible as a whole is clear that disobeying God has severe consequences (see, e.g., Gen 9:5-6; Num 35:16-21; Lev 20:10; Zech 5:4). Those who oppose God’s will and rule will ultimately be excluded from his life-giving presence (Isa 66:14-24). In this vein, several passages in Hebrews warn that those who fail to take God’s word seriously are in deep spiritual trouble and will face the judgment of God (see Heb 2:1-4; 4:12-13; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 12:25-29).<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have understood the nature of the <em>apostasy<\/em> (falling away) and judgment described in the “warning passages” of Hebrews in various ways: (1) Some have understood the warnings to be hypothetical, suggesting that the harshness serves simply to shock the hearers out of spiritual lethargy, with no impending judgment in view. (2) A second position holds that those with whom the author was concerned were Jewish and had not yet converted to Christianity. Thus they were under God’s judgment because they were not yet a part of the new covenant. (3) A third view argues that the “apostates” in view were Christians who, because of their spiritual condition, faced some measure of God’s judgment as believers, but were in no danger of actually losing their salvation. (4) A fourth view suggests that the apostates had been full members of the Christian community and had experienced the full reality of the Christian faith but had now turned their backs on Christ and the church. (5) A fifth view is that, rather than having been true believers, the apostates showed that they never really knew Christ in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, warnings of judgment are an expression of God’s grace, seeking to turn the rebellious person to the ways of God. Taking the consequences of apostasy seriously can help us build resolve in faithfully following Jesus.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Num 16:1-50; Deut 13:1-18; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8:1-18; Matt 24:10-13; Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Heb 2:1-4; 6:4-8; 10:26-31; 2 Pet 2:1-22; 1 Jn 2:18-19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","summary_en":"Apostasy Sadly, opposition to God is not limited to those outside the community of faith; the Bible tells of many people who seemed to know God but turned away (see Num 16; Deut 13; 2 Kgs 17:5-23; Ezek 8). God brings just consequences to those who turn away from him (Job 11:20; Prov 1:24-31; Jer 11:11). Jesus spoke of those who fall away and the judgment they will receive (Matt 16:27; 23:13; 24:10-13; 25:41-46), and the writers of the New Testament follow his lead (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Tim 3:1-9; 2 P...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150680,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","title_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge","content_ro":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Coming of the Lord as Judge<\/h3>\n<p>The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Christ neglect to show mercy (2:13), befriend the world (4:4), sin through speech (4:11; 5:9), or live to satisfy evil desires (4:1, 16), they, too, will be judged by the law that was intended to set them free (2:12).<\/p>\n<p>The Lord’s future coming influences present realities. God already honors the faithful poor and humiliates the exploitative rich (1:9-10; 5:2-3). Christ’s followers have already become God’s prized possession as God is restoring all things (1:18). James declares that we should obey the royal law of the messianic kingdom (2:8), of which followers of Christ have become heirs (2:5).<\/p>\n<p>The coming of the Lord may not be immediate, so James exhorts Christians to endure (1:3-4) and wait patiently for Christ’s return (5:7-8). They will receive the crown of eternal life (1:12) and reap the harvest of righteousness sown by a life of faithfulness to God (3:18).<\/p>\n<p>In view of impending judgment, James exhorts Christ’s followers to resist the devil and to humble themselves before God (4:7). We must grieve over sin, live with pure intentions and behavior (4:8-9), and rescue any Christian brother or sister who is headed toward death (5:19-20). Like Elijah, we must practice faith, prayer, and confession (5:13-18). Like Job, we must endure suffering, discovering in the end the scope of God’s kindness and mercy (4:10; 5:11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Sam 2:10; Pss 2:7-12; 96:11-13; Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3; Matt 16:27; Luke 12:35-48; 18:8; John 5:22-30; Acts 10:42; 1 Cor 4:5; Jas 5:7-9; 1 Jn 2:28<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","summary_en":"The Coming of the Lord as Judge The Bible is clear that there will be a day of judgment (Jas 5:3), and the book of James provides followers of Christ with both a warning and a promise regarding that day. James announces the future coming of the Lord as Judge (Jas 5:7-9; cp. Isa 26:21; Mic 1:3). God, who gave the law, is the Judge who has the power to save and destroy (4:12). Those who slander Jesus Christ and oppress his followers will be slaughtered (see 2:6-7; 5:5-6). If those who follow Ch...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":54827,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","summary_en":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82453,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","summary_en":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110079,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","summary_en":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137705,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 16:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 16:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>16:28<\/strong> This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, <em>coming<\/em> would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. • The expression <em>Son of Man<\/em> (16:27-28) forms an <em>inclusio<\/em> (bracketing expression) with 16:13, unifying 16:13-28 around the theme of the identity of the Son of Man. He is the Messiah who would suffer and then be exalted by God and return as Judge.<\/p>","summary_ro":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","summary_en":"16:28 This saying has been taken to refer either to (1) the transfiguration that follows (17:1-13); (2) the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (27:50-53; 28:1-10); (3) Pentecost (Acts 2:1-47); (4) the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt 24:1-31); (5) the second coming of Christ in the future (24:29-31); or (6) an unfolding revelation of God’s Kingdom in various ways, including the evangelism of the world. In the fourth view, coming would mean “coming in judgment” upon sinful Israel. •...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}