Matei 18
1 În clipa aceea, ucenicii s-au apropiat de Isus, şi L-au întrebat: ,,Cine este mai mare în Împărăţia cerurilor?``
2 Isus a chemat la El un copilaş, l-a pus în mijlocul lor,
3 şi le-a zis: ,,Adevărat vă spun că, dacă nu vă veţi întoarce la Dumnezeu şi nu vă veţi face ca nişte copilaşi, cu nici un chip nu veţi intra în Împărăţia cerurilor.
4 Deaceea, oricine se va smeri ca acest copilaş, va fi cel mai mare în Împărăţia cerurilor.
5 Şi oricine va primi un copilaş ca acesta în Numele Meu, Mă primeşte pe Mine.
6 Dar pentru oricine va face să păcătuiască pe unul din aceşti micuţi, cari cred în Mine, ar fi mai de folos să i se atârne de gât o piatră mare de moară, şi să fie înecat în adâncul mării.
7 Vai de lume, din pricina prilejurilor de păcătuire! Fiindcă nu se poate să nu vină prilejuri de păcătuire; dar vai de omul acela prin care vine prilejul de păcătuire!
8 Acum, dacă mâna ta sau piciorul tău te face să cazi în păcat, taie-le şi leapădă-le dela tine. Este mai bine pentru tine să intri în viaţă şchiop sau ciung, decât să ai două mâni sau două picioare, şi să fii aruncat în focul vecinic.
9 Şi dacă ochiul tău te face să cazi în păcat, scoate-l şi leapădă-l dela tine. Este mai bine pentru tine să intri în viaţă numai cu un ochi, decât să ai amândoi ochii, şi să fii aruncat în focul gheenei.
10 Feriţi-vă să nu defăimaţi nici măcar pe unul din aceşti micuţi; căci vă spun că îngerii lor în ceruri văd pururea faţa Tatălui Meu care este în ceruri.
11 Fiindcă Fiul omului a venit să mântuiască ce era pierdut.
12 Ce credeţi? Dacă un om are o sută de oi, şi se rătăceşte una din ele, nu lasă el pe cele nouăzeci şi nouă pe munţi, şi se duce să caute pe cea rătăcită?
13 Şi, dacă i se întâmplă s-o găsească, adevărat vă spun, că are mai multă bucurie de ea, decât de cele nouăzeci şi nouă, cari nu se rătăciseră.
14 Tot aşa, nu este voia Tatălui vostru celui din ceruri să piară unul măcar din aceşti micuţi.
15 Dacă fratele tău a păcătuit împotriva ta, du-te şi mustră-l între tine şi el singur. Dacă te ascultă, ai cîştigat pe fratele tău.
16 Dar, dacă nu te ascultă, mai ia cu tine unul sau doi inşi, pentruca orice vorbă să fie sprijinită pe mărturia a doi sau trei martori.
17 Dacă nu vrea să asculte de ei, spune-l Bisericii; şi, dacă nu vrea să asculte nici de Biserică, să fie pentru tine ca un păgân şi ca un vameş.
18 Adevărat vă spun, că orice veţi lega pe pământ, va fi legat în cer; şi orice veţi deslega pe pământ, va fi deslegat în cer.
19 Vă mai spun iarăş, că, dacă doi dintre voi se învoiesc pe pământ să ceară un lucru oarecare, le va fi dat de Tatăl Meu care este în ceruri.
20 Căci acolo unde sânt doi sau trei adunaţi în Numele Meu, sânt şi Eu în mijlocul lor.``
21 Atunci Petru s-a apropiat de El, şi I-a zis: ,,Doamne de câte ori să iert pe fratele Meu când va păcătui împotriva mea? Până la şapte ori?``
22 Isus i-a zis: ,,Eu nu-ţi zic până la şapte ori, ci până la şaptezeci de ori câte şapte.
23 Deaceea, Împărăţia cerurilor se aseamănă cu un împărat, care a vrut să se socotească cu robii săi.
24 A început să facă socoteala, şi i-au adus pe unul, care îi datora zece mii de galbeni.
25 Fiindcă el n-avea cu ce plăti, stăpânul lui a poruncit să-l vândă pe el, pe nevasta lui, pe copiii lui, şi tot ce avea, şi să se plătească datoria.
26 Robul s-a aruncat la pământ, i s-a închinat, şi a zis: ,Doamne, mai îngăduieşte-mă, şi-ţi voi plăti tot.`
27 Stăpânul robului aceluia, făcându-i-se milă de el, i-a dat drumul, şi i-a iertat datoria.
28 Robul acela, când a ieşit afară, a întâlnit pe unul din tovarăşii lui de slujbă, care-i era dator o sută de lei. A pus mâna pe el, şi-l strângea de gât, zicând: ,Plăteşte-mi ce-mi eşti dator.`
29 Tovarăşul lui s-a aruncat la pământ, îl ruga, şi zicea: ,Mai îngăduieşte-mă, şi-ţi voi plăti.`
30 Dar el n-a vrut, ci s-a dus şi l-a aruncat în temniţă, până va plăti datoria.
31 Când au văzut tovarăşii lui cele întâmplate, s-au întristat foarte mult, şi s-au dus de au spus stăpânului lor toate cele petrecute.
32 Atunci stăpânul a chemat la el pe robul acesta, şi i-a zis: ,Rob vicelan! Eu ţi-am iertat toată datoria, fiindcă m-ai rugat.
33 Oare nu se cădea să ai şi tu milă de tovarăşul tău, cum am avut eu milă de tine?`
34 Şi stăpânul s-a mâniat şi l-a dat pe mâna chinuitorilor, până va plăti tot ce datora.
35 Tot aşa vă va face şi Tatăl Meu cel ceresc, dacă fiecare din voi nu iartă din toată inima pe fratele său.``
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":24701,"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":54841,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","summary_en":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54842,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","summary_en":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82467,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","summary_en":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82468,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","summary_en":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110093,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","summary_en":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110094,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","summary_en":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137719,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1-35<\/strong> This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:21-35). As with the other discourses, a concluding formula (19:1-2) bridges to the next section.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","summary_en":"18:1-35 This fourth major discourse in Matthew (see study note on Matt 5:1–7:29) focuses on responses to the Messiah—acceptance by the disciples and rejection by the Jewish leaders and most of the populace. In light of this growing polarization, Jesus began to instruct his followers on the nature of community life. For a community to live according to Jesus’ standards, it must live with humility (18:1-5), sensitivity (18:6-9), compassion (18:10-14), discipline (18:15-18), and forgiveness (18:...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137720,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:1<\/strong> <em>About that time:<\/em> Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:25) or Peter, James, and John (17:1-3).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","summary_en":"18:1 About that time: Matthew connects the disciples’ questions with the previous discussion concerning the Temple. The disciples began to assume that their new freedom in relation to Jewish authority entitled them to authority of their own. In addition, talk of special revelations (11:25-27; 13:11-17) and roles of leadership (10:2-4; 19:28) probably gave rise to jealous comparisons and petty desires for power among the disciples, perhaps revolving around the apparent privilege of Peter (17:2...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63663,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91289,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118915,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146541,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":7515,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Conversion","title_en":"Conversion","content_ro":"<h3>CONVERSION<\/h3>\n<p>Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign nations needed to turn to God for the first time (Ps 22:27). The characteristic feature is that one turns from wickedness (Jer 26:3; 36:3; Ez 18:21, 27; 33:9, 11), from a life of disloyalty to God to a life of obedience to God (Is 10:20-21; 14:2; Jer 34:15; Hos 14:4). Conversion means a change in inward orientation that finds expression in a changed lifestyle.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT John the Baptist begins the call to conversion (Mt 3:2; Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3), giving a prophetic call for people to change their minds (which is the root meaning of the Greek term) in the light of the nearness of God’s kingdom. This change of life must include a change in actions to prove its reality (Mt 3:8; Lk 3:8). Jesus preached the same message (Mt 4:17; Mk 1:15), adding that since the kingdom had arrived in his person, obedience to him was part of the good news of conversion. Yet it could also be bad news, for one would be damned if he failed to make this radical change (Mt 11:20; Lk 13:3-5). Conversion is radical but also simple, for it requires the simplicity of a child who commits his whole self, not the calculating self-protectiveness of the adult (Mt 18:3).<\/p>\n<p>Outside the Gospels, “conversion” is not a frequently used term except in the book of Acts, where it forms the call to commitment climaxing evangelistic sermons (2:38; 3:19; 8:22), describes the commitment of new Christians to the Lord (9:35; 11:21), and pictures the change of life as a turning from darkness to light (26:18-20). Later writers look back upon conversion (2 Cor 3:16), worry about Christians converting to paganism or Judaism (Gal 4:9), and call for the reconversion of Christians who have left the faith and are in danger of judgment (Jas 5:19-20; Rv 2:5, 16, 22; 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT and in the preaching of John and Jesus, conversion has three factors. First, it is a turning <em>from<\/em> something, which includes specific sins, false gods, or simply a life lived for oneself (1 Thes 1:9; Rv 9:20-21; 16:11). Second, conversion is a product of the will of God and his gracious working in the world (Acts 11:18; Rom 2:4; 2 Cor 7:10; 2 Tm 2:25; 2 Pt 3:9). Third, conversion is a turning <em>to<\/em> someone, a commitment of one’s whole life to God in Jesus Christ (Acts 14:15; 1 Thes 1:9; 1 Pt 2:25). It is thus a total reorientation, whether spectacular or undramatic, sudden or gradual, emotional or calm, in which a person transfers his or her total allegiance to God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Faith; Grace; Justification, Justified; Repentance; Sanctification.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CONVERSION<\/h3>\n<p>Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign nations needed to turn to God for the first time (Ps 22:27). The characteristic feature is that one turns from wickedness (Jer 26:3; 36:3; Ez 18:21, 27; 33:9, 11), from a life of disloyalty to God to a life of obedience to God (Is 10:20-21; 14:2; Jer 34:15; Hos 14:4). Conversion means a change in inward orientation that finds expression in a changed lifestyle.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT John the Baptist begins the call to conversion (Mt 3:2; Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3), giving a prophetic call for people to change their minds (which is the root meaning of the Greek term) in the light of the nearness of God’s kingdom. This change of life must include a change in actions to prove its reality (Mt 3:8; Lk 3:8). Jesus preached the same message (Mt 4:17; Mk 1:15), adding that since the kingdom had arrived in his person, obedience to him was part of the good news of conversion. Yet it could also be bad news, for one would be damned if he failed to make this radical change (Mt 11:20; Lk 13:3-5). Conversion is radical but also simple, for it requires the simplicity of a child who commits his whole self, not the calculating self-protectiveness of the adult (Mt 18:3).<\/p>\n<p>Outside the Gospels, “conversion” is not a frequently used term except in the book of Acts, where it forms the call to commitment climaxing evangelistic sermons (2:38; 3:19; 8:22), describes the commitment of new Christians to the Lord (9:35; 11:21), and pictures the change of life as a turning from darkness to light (26:18-20). Later writers look back upon conversion (2 Cor 3:16), worry about Christians converting to paganism or Judaism (Gal 4:9), and call for the reconversion of Christians who have left the faith and are in danger of judgment (Jas 5:19-20; Rv 2:5, 16, 22; 3:19).<\/p>\n<p>As in the OT and in the preaching of John and Jesus, conversion has three factors. First, it is a turning <em>from<\/em> something, which includes specific sins, false gods, or simply a life lived for oneself (1 Thes 1:9; Rv 9:20-21; 16:11). Second, conversion is a product of the will of God and his gracious working in the world (Acts 11:18; Rom 2:4; 2 Cor 7:10; 2 Tm 2:25; 2 Pt 3:9). Third, conversion is a turning <em>to<\/em> someone, a commitment of one’s whole life to God in Jesus Christ (Acts 14:15; 1 Thes 1:9; 1 Pt 2:25). It is thus a total reorientation, whether spectacular or undramatic, sudden or gradual, emotional or calm, in which a person transfers his or her total allegiance to God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Faith; Grace; Justification, Justified; Repentance; Sanctification.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CONVERSION Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance. In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign n...","summary_en":"CONVERSION Total change in one’s direction in life or moral orientation. For Christians this means a change from an orientation that does not take God into account to one in which the person is submitted to Christ. Conversion is the result of repentance. In the OT conversion is basically a turning or returning from one’s former course of life toward the Lord, the God of Israel. Israel often had to return to their God (Dt 4:30), either as individuals (Ps 51) or as a nation (Jer 4:1); foreign n...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54843,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","summary_en":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82469,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","summary_en":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110095,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","summary_en":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137721,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:3","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:3","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:3<\/strong> <em>Like little children<\/em> means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","summary_en":"18:3 Like little children means to be humble (18:4). The disciples had been intent on status and ambition.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61938,"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":89564,"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":117190,"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":144816,"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}],"4":[{"id":21459,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Justification*, Justified","title_en":"Justification*, Justified","content_ro":"<h3>JUSTIFICATION*, JUSTIFIED<\/h3>\n<p>The act of God in bringing sinners into a new covenant relationship with himself through the forgiveness of sins. It is a declarative act of God by which he establishes persons as righteous—that is, in right and true relationship to himself.<\/p>\n<p>Since the time of the Reformation, when Martin Luther reestablished the doctrine of justification by faith alone as the cornerstone for theological understanding, this term has had special significance in the history of theology. To Luther it represented a rediscovery of the writings of Paul and a fundamental counterthrust to medieval Catholicism with its theology of works and indulgences. The doctrine of justification by faith alone affirms the thoroughgoing sinfulness of all persons, their total inability to deal effectively with their own sin, and the gracious provision through the death of Jesus Christ of a complete atonement for sin, to which persons respond in simple trust without any special claims or merit of their own.<\/p>\n<p>The noun “justification” and the verb “to justify” are not used often in Scripture. In the <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, the verb is found only in the OT, and there fewer than 25 times. In the NT both terms are used only 40 times. The more frequent and more important terms that translate the same Hebrew and Greek words are “righteousness” and “to declare (or make) righteous.” Any understanding of justification, therefore, directly involves a biblical understanding of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>In common Greek, “justification” and “justify” are frequently forensic terms; that is, they relate to the law court and the act of acquitting or vindicating someone. It has to do with the innocence or virtue of a person. But more broadly it has to do with the norm of any relationship.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT righteousness has to do with relationship and the obligations of that relationship. At times one is referred to as righteous because he or she stands in right relationship to another. At other times one is righteous because he or she fulfills certain obligations in a relationship (Gn 38:26). But more important, these terms are used with reference to God, who is viewed as just. He governs with justice (18:25), and his judgments are true and righteous (Ps 19:9). Both the innocent and the guilty know well the justice of God; the former know they will be vindicated and the latter know his law prevails.<\/p>\n<p>Justification and righteousness have technical significance because of their close association with the saving activity of God on behalf of his covenant people. The righteousness of God is bound up not so much with justice as with his intervention on behalf of his people under the covenant. The righteousness of God or the act of justification is, therefore, to be viewed not primarily in terms of law but in terms of covenant. The most important expression of this is the example of Abraham, who was reckoned righteous, that is, brought into personal relationship by virtue of his response of faith to the covenant offered by God (Gn 15:6). Abraham could not justify himself, but on the basis of the covenant, God established him as righteous. All persons share the helplessness of Abraham. In the sight of God no one shall stand justified (Ps 143:2). The hope of humanity is that God will remember his covenant. Righteousness is hence a product of the mercy or grace of God, who deals with his people according to his lovingkindness (Is 63:7). Justification is thus derived from the nature of God; it is primarily a religious term, and only secondly ethical.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Almost all discussion of justification in the NT is found in the letters of Paul, primarily in those to the Romans and Galatians. In these two letters it is one of the fundamental terms by which Paul seeks to set forth the consequences of the work of Christ for sinful humanity. Justification by faith is set primarily against the background of Jewish legalism and its attempts to make the law the basis of salvation. Paul regards this as an alien message requiring the strongest condemnation (Gal 1:6-9). The word and work of Christ, embedded in the message that Paul proclaimed, was a reminder that righteousness or justification is the gift of God through the blood (<em>covenant<\/em> blood, Heb 13:20) of Jesus Christ. All this is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21). The law, in fact, is not capable of leading one to righteousness, nor was it given to bring about righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Galatians 3:15-25 is especially instructive in understanding the function of the law, which came 430 years after the covenant by which Abraham was brought into a living, personal relationship with the holy God. Whatever purpose the law had, it was not given as a means of righteousness. “For if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law” (Gal 3:21, <span>rsv<\/span>). The atoning work of Christ for the justification of people is to be seen in terms of covenant rather than law. This is the essential argument of Paul in this section of Galatians, namely, that justification, from the time of Abraham, has been through faith in the God who keeps covenant and has never come by the law. “Righteousness” is therefore a relational term and is affirmed by one who by faith has been brought into right relationship with God. The law brings judgment; it confronts one with his incapacity to cope with sin (Acts 13:39; Rom 8:3). Justification, then, has its forensic (judicial) dimensions in that it copes with, and represents salvation to, the problem of sin and guilt. The believer is set free from condemnation (Rom 8:1). Yet the fundamental understanding of justification is to be gained in moving away from the law and judgment to the covenant and grace. The appeal to Abraham in both Romans and Galatians is to show that the covenant has always been the only hope of humanity. God keeps his covenant, even though his covenant people violate it daily.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s formulation of the gospel, God is both just and the one who justifies. Sin demands judgment and must be dealt with. God’s pattern of bringing people into personal relationship now stands manifest apart from the law in the ministry and death of Christ, whom God put forth as the atoning agent (Rom 3:21-26). Sin is dealt with directly in the death of the sinless one who became sin for us so that we might in him become the righteousness of God (2 Cor 5:21). In his substitutionary death he bears the guilt of all humanity so that by responding in trust mankind might know God in true relationship.<\/p>\n\n<p>For Paul, then, justification in view of human sinfulness is rooted in the nature of God who alone is able to take initiative in the healing and redeeming of humanity. Justification is by grace alone. Rooted in the nature of God, it is also made available through the work of Christ as God’s gift. Thus, we have the often repeated confession that Christ died “for us” (Rom 5:8; 1 Thes 5:10), or “for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3). The means of appropriation is by faith and faith alone (Rom 3:22; 5:1). This faith is a simple trust in the sufficiency of the work of Christ, a trust by which one freely and wholeheartedly identifies with Christ, loves and embraces his Word, and gives himself to the value system expressed in the kingdom of God. The basic self-consciousness of the justified person is that his right relationship with the living God has nothing to do with merit or achievement. It is from beginning to end a gift of infinite love. His own powerlessness is resolved in the power of the gospel in which God’s saving work is revealed (1:17).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels justification appears in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector who went into the temple to pray. The former drew attention to his pious works and moral superiority. The latter, humbled by a deep sense of sin and unworthiness, could only cry for mercy. This man, according to Jesus, went down to his house justified (Lk 18:14). Though this is the only instance of the terminology of justification by faith, the entire ministry of Jesus was among people preoccupied with their own piety and the task of justifying themselves before God, people who set themselves over against sinners and undesirables, people who were so involved in their own works that they were offended by the language of grace and the full pardon of sinners (7:36-50). Jesus spoke to the same issue that later plagued Paul. Only the humble before God will be exalted (Mt 18:4; 23:12). Only the sinner hears the word of grace (Lk 5:32; 15:7, 10; 19:7). The unworthy find healing (Mt 8:8).<\/p>\n<p>Justification (or righteousness) by faith is always to be reaffirmed, for within each person there is the almost inevitable and natural desire to establish personal righteousness, to be able to stand before God on the basis of personal character and piety. But the revival and well-being of the church (note that both Luther and Wesley turned from works to faith upon their study of Romans) is rooted in the understanding that the just live by faith (Rom 1:17; Heb 10:38; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Faith; Law, Biblical Concept of; Sanctification.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUSTIFICATION*, JUSTIFIED<\/h3>\n<p>The act of God in bringing sinners into a new covenant relationship with himself through the forgiveness of sins. It is a declarative act of God by which he establishes persons as righteous—that is, in right and true relationship to himself.<\/p>\n<p>Since the time of the Reformation, when Martin Luther reestablished the doctrine of justification by faith alone as the cornerstone for theological understanding, this term has had special significance in the history of theology. To Luther it represented a rediscovery of the writings of Paul and a fundamental counterthrust to medieval Catholicism with its theology of works and indulgences. The doctrine of justification by faith alone affirms the thoroughgoing sinfulness of all persons, their total inability to deal effectively with their own sin, and the gracious provision through the death of Jesus Christ of a complete atonement for sin, to which persons respond in simple trust without any special claims or merit of their own.<\/p>\n<p>The noun “justification” and the verb “to justify” are not used often in Scripture. In the <span>kjv<\/span>, for example, the verb is found only in the OT, and there fewer than 25 times. In the NT both terms are used only 40 times. The more frequent and more important terms that translate the same Hebrew and Greek words are “righteousness” and “to declare (or make) righteous.” Any understanding of justification, therefore, directly involves a biblical understanding of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>In common Greek, “justification” and “justify” are frequently forensic terms; that is, they relate to the law court and the act of acquitting or vindicating someone. It has to do with the innocence or virtue of a person. But more broadly it has to do with the norm of any relationship.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT righteousness has to do with relationship and the obligations of that relationship. At times one is referred to as righteous because he or she stands in right relationship to another. At other times one is righteous because he or she fulfills certain obligations in a relationship (Gn 38:26). But more important, these terms are used with reference to God, who is viewed as just. He governs with justice (18:25), and his judgments are true and righteous (Ps 19:9). Both the innocent and the guilty know well the justice of God; the former know they will be vindicated and the latter know his law prevails.<\/p>\n<p>Justification and righteousness have technical significance because of their close association with the saving activity of God on behalf of his covenant people. The righteousness of God is bound up not so much with justice as with his intervention on behalf of his people under the covenant. The righteousness of God or the act of justification is, therefore, to be viewed not primarily in terms of law but in terms of covenant. The most important expression of this is the example of Abraham, who was reckoned righteous, that is, brought into personal relationship by virtue of his response of faith to the covenant offered by God (Gn 15:6). Abraham could not justify himself, but on the basis of the covenant, God established him as righteous. All persons share the helplessness of Abraham. In the sight of God no one shall stand justified (Ps 143:2). The hope of humanity is that God will remember his covenant. Righteousness is hence a product of the mercy or grace of God, who deals with his people according to his lovingkindness (Is 63:7). Justification is thus derived from the nature of God; it is primarily a religious term, and only secondly ethical.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Almost all discussion of justification in the NT is found in the letters of Paul, primarily in those to the Romans and Galatians. In these two letters it is one of the fundamental terms by which Paul seeks to set forth the consequences of the work of Christ for sinful humanity. Justification by faith is set primarily against the background of Jewish legalism and its attempts to make the law the basis of salvation. Paul regards this as an alien message requiring the strongest condemnation (Gal 1:6-9). The word and work of Christ, embedded in the message that Paul proclaimed, was a reminder that righteousness or justification is the gift of God through the blood (<em>covenant<\/em> blood, Heb 13:20) of Jesus Christ. All this is entirely apart from the law (Rom 3:21). The law, in fact, is not capable of leading one to righteousness, nor was it given to bring about righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Galatians 3:15-25 is especially instructive in understanding the function of the law, which came 430 years after the covenant by which Abraham was brought into a living, personal relationship with the holy God. Whatever purpose the law had, it was not given as a means of righteousness. “For if a law had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law” (Gal 3:21, <span>rsv<\/span>). The atoning work of Christ for the justification of people is to be seen in terms of covenant rather than law. This is the essential argument of Paul in this section of Galatians, namely, that justification, from the time of Abraham, has been through faith in the God who keeps covenant and has never come by the law. “Righteousness” is therefore a relational term and is affirmed by one who by faith has been brought into right relationship with God. The law brings judgment; it confronts one with his incapacity to cope with sin (Acts 13:39; Rom 8:3). Justification, then, has its forensic (judicial) dimensions in that it copes with, and represents salvation to, the problem of sin and guilt. The believer is set free from condemnation (Rom 8:1). Yet the fundamental understanding of justification is to be gained in moving away from the law and judgment to the covenant and grace. The appeal to Abraham in both Romans and Galatians is to show that the covenant has always been the only hope of humanity. God keeps his covenant, even though his covenant people violate it daily.<\/p>\n<p>In Paul’s formulation of the gospel, God is both just and the one who justifies. Sin demands judgment and must be dealt with. God’s pattern of bringing people into personal relationship now stands manifest apart from the law in the ministry and death of Christ, whom God put forth as the atoning agent (Rom 3:21-26). Sin is dealt with directly in the death of the sinless one who became sin for us so that we might in him become the righteousness of God (2 Cor 5:21). In his substitutionary death he bears the guilt of all humanity so that by responding in trust mankind might know God in true relationship.<\/p>\n\n<p>For Paul, then, justification in view of human sinfulness is rooted in the nature of God who alone is able to take initiative in the healing and redeeming of humanity. Justification is by grace alone. Rooted in the nature of God, it is also made available through the work of Christ as God’s gift. Thus, we have the often repeated confession that Christ died “for us” (Rom 5:8; 1 Thes 5:10), or “for our sins” (1 Cor 15:3). The means of appropriation is by faith and faith alone (Rom 3:22; 5:1). This faith is a simple trust in the sufficiency of the work of Christ, a trust by which one freely and wholeheartedly identifies with Christ, loves and embraces his Word, and gives himself to the value system expressed in the kingdom of God. The basic self-consciousness of the justified person is that his right relationship with the living God has nothing to do with merit or achievement. It is from beginning to end a gift of infinite love. His own powerlessness is resolved in the power of the gospel in which God’s saving work is revealed (1:17).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels justification appears in the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector who went into the temple to pray. The former drew attention to his pious works and moral superiority. The latter, humbled by a deep sense of sin and unworthiness, could only cry for mercy. This man, according to Jesus, went down to his house justified (Lk 18:14). Though this is the only instance of the terminology of justification by faith, the entire ministry of Jesus was among people preoccupied with their own piety and the task of justifying themselves before God, people who set themselves over against sinners and undesirables, people who were so involved in their own works that they were offended by the language of grace and the full pardon of sinners (7:36-50). Jesus spoke to the same issue that later plagued Paul. Only the humble before God will be exalted (Mt 18:4; 23:12). Only the sinner hears the word of grace (Lk 5:32; 15:7, 10; 19:7). The unworthy find healing (Mt 8:8).<\/p>\n<p>Justification (or righteousness) by faith is always to be reaffirmed, for within each person there is the almost inevitable and natural desire to establish personal righteousness, to be able to stand before God on the basis of personal character and piety. But the revival and well-being of the church (note that both Luther and Wesley turned from works to faith upon their study of Romans) is rooted in the understanding that the just live by faith (Rom 1:17; Heb 10:38; 11:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Adoption; Faith; Law, Biblical Concept of; Sanctification.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUSTIFICATION*, JUSTIFIED The act of God in bringing sinners into a new covenant relationship with himself through the forgiveness of sins. It is a declarative act of God by which he establishes persons as righteous—that is, in right and true relationship to himself. Since the time of the Reformation, when Martin Luther reestablished the doctrine of justification by faith alone as the cornerstone for theological understanding, this term has had special significance in the history of theology....","summary_en":"JUSTIFICATION*, JUSTIFIED The act of God in bringing sinners into a new covenant relationship with himself through the forgiveness of sins. It is a declarative act of God by which he establishes persons as righteous—that is, in right and true relationship to himself. Since the time of the Reformation, when Martin Luther reestablished the doctrine of justification by faith alone as the cornerstone for theological understanding, this term has had special significance in the history of theology....","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60663,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Servant-Leader","title_en":"The Servant-Leader","content_ro":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","summary_en":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63676,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88289,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Servant-Leader","title_en":"The Servant-Leader","content_ro":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","summary_en":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91302,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115915,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Servant-Leader","title_en":"The Servant-Leader","content_ro":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","summary_en":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118928,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143541,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Servant-Leader","title_en":"The Servant-Leader","content_ro":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Servant-Leader<\/h3>\n<p>A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role.<\/p>\n<p>The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13). Every event in Moses’ story from the time he was called by God indicates that he understood his leadership as derived from his service to God. He was submissive, selfless, and faithful. His interactions with his fellow Israelites were characterized by empathy, persuasiveness, and vision. Moses stood in the gap at a critical moment in Israelite history and repeatedly interceded on behalf of the people. Moses’ remarkably humble submission to God served as the basis for his role as a great leader.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus of Nazareth is the ideal servant-leader. The Gospels portray Jesus as the Lord’s “Suffering Servant” (see Isa 52:13–53:12), especially in his sacrificial death, which was his ultimate act of service (Mark 10:45). Jesus spoke with great authority, but did so humbly, understanding his role as a shepherd who sacrifices his life for his sheep (John 10:11). He spent time with children and used them as models for those who desire to follow God wholeheartedly (Matt 18:4). When James and John asked him to give them an elevated rank in his Kingdom, Jesus criticized their worldly ambition (Mark 10:35-45) and set their priorities straight by instructing them to follow his example of servanthood (Matt 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:43-45). As a model for all who want to lead others through a life of service, Jesus understood that his purpose was to bring glory to God’s name (John 12:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>The apostles Paul and Peter followed Christ’s example and fulfilled his ideal of servant leadership. Paul’s life of service demonstrated humility and tireless efforts on behalf of others (see 2 Cor 11:23-28). He taught Christians to do the same (Rom 8:17; Gal 5:13; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3) and praised those who did so (e.g., Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7). Peter also exemplified self-sacrificial service to Christ (e.g., Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42), and his instructions define the character of a servant-leader clearly and concisely (1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:8-12; 14:11-24; 30:31-32; Exod 14:31; Num 12:3, 7-8; Deut 34:10-12; 1 Kgs 12:1-7; Isa 52:13–53:12; Matt 18:4; 20:24-28; 23:11-12; Mark 10:35-45; John 10:11; 12:27-28; Acts 3:1-11; 4:13-22; 5:12-16; 9:32-42; Rom 8:17; 2 Cor 11:23-27; Gal 5:13; Phil 2:25-30; Col 4:7; 2 Tim 1:8; 2:3; 1 Pet 4:10-11; 5:1-5<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","summary_en":"The Servant-Leader A servant-leader is characterized by an overwhelming desire to accomplish a purpose through serving others. The leader’s heart compels this person to assume a servant role. The Old Testament describes Moses as the Lord’s servant (Exod 14:31; Num 12:7-8). Moses did not seek power, prestige, or material gain, but assumed his leadership role reluctantly. He used his prophetic authority with humility (Num 12:3), knowing that he was subject to God (see Deut 34:10-12; Hos 12:13)....","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146554,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Pride and Humility","title_en":"Pride and Humility","content_ro":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Pride and Humility<\/h3>\n<p>Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (1:7), a recognition of God’s sovereignty and centrality. A humble person is able to recognize their mistakes and listen to another’s correction (10:17; 12:1). Pride, meanwhile, can block one’s ability to learn from others, leads to conflict (13:10), and results in disgrace (11:2).<\/p>\n<p>In the divine economy, pride results in destruction and humiliation while humility leads to honor (16:18; 18:12; 29:23). When Jesus was asked “Who is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” he responded by pointing to the exemplary humility of a little child (Matt 18:1-5). On another occasion, Jesus told a parable that contrasted the prideful prayer of a religious leader and the humble prayer of a tax collector, concluding with the words, “Those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted” (Luke 18:9-14; see also Matt 23:8-12; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus himself provided the ultimate example in humility. Though being God’s son, he “did not think of equality with God as something to cling to,” but rather he “took the humble position of a slave” and “humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (Phil 2:6-8). God calls us to display the same kind of self-sacrificial humility in our own lives (Phil 2:3-5; 1 Jn 3:16).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1 Kgs 3:5-14; 2 Chr 26:14-20; Prov 10:17; 11:2; 12:15; 15:5; 22:4; 29:23; Matt 5:5; 18:4; 21:5; Luke 18:9-14; Eph 4:2; Phil 2:3; Jas 1:21; 3:13; 4:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","summary_en":"Pride and Humility Pride is a natural human response to success and achievement, and the world places great value on recognition and fame (see 1 Jn 2:16). Yet, pride is rooted in self-centeredness, and it often exists side by side with the diminishment of others. Scripture frequently cautions against pride and its destructive results, encouraging instead an attitude of humility. The book of Proverbs links humility with wisdom (see Prov 11:2), which has its foundation in the fear of the Lord (...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"5":[{"id":54844,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","summary_en":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82470,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","summary_en":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110096,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","summary_en":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137722,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:5","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:5","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:5<\/strong> Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","summary_en":"18:5 Jesus moved the discussion toward solidarity within the community; to welcome a humble follower of Jesus is to welcome Jesus himself (see 10:40-42).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"6":[{"id":24790,"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":54845,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","summary_en":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82471,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","summary_en":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110097,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","summary_en":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137723,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:6","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:6","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:6<\/strong> To <em>cause one<\/em> . . . <em>to fall into sin<\/em> is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation <em>little ones<\/em> emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a <em>large millstone<\/em> around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","summary_en":"18:6 To cause one . . . to fall into sin is to lead believing children (or possibly believing adults who become “like children”; see 18:3) to reject Christ and abandon the faith. • The designation little ones emphasizes their humility (5:3-12; 18:4; 19:13-15). • Though the thought of being drowned with a large millstone around the neck is frightful, Jesus warned that causing another to fall away will bring far greater misery (18:7; 26:24; Rev 18:21; see Matt 22:13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"7":[{"id":28143,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offense Offend","title_en":"Offense Offend","content_ro":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","summary_en":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35489,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Sin","title_en":"Sin","content_ro":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SIN<\/h3>\n<p>Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Terminology\">Terminology<\/p>\n<p>Israel’s God sets the ideal, the standard for human behavior. The most frequent biblical words for sin speak of violating that standard in some fashion. The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">hata’<\/span> and Greek <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">hamartia<\/span> meant originally “to miss the mark, fail in duty” (Rom 3:23). As Lawgiver, God sets limits to man’s freedom; another frequent term (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘abar<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">parabasis<\/span>) describes sin as “transgression,” “overstepping set limits.” Similar terms are <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pesha‘<\/span> (Hebrew), meaning “rebellion,” “transgression”; <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">’asham<\/span> (Hebrew) denotes “trespassing God’s kingly prerogative,” “incurring guilt”; <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paraptoma<\/span> (Greek) denotes “a false step out of the appointed way,” “trespass on forbidden ground.” “Iniquity” often translates <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘aon<\/span> (Hebrew, meaning “perverseness,” “wrongness”), for which the nearest NT equivalent is <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawlessness”) or <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paranomia<\/span> (Greek, “lawbreaking”).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Genesis traces sin to deliberate misuse of God-given freedom in disobedience of a single limiting prohibition. Ezekiel insists eloquently upon individual responsibility against traditional theories of corporate guilt (Ez 18). Following Jeremiah, he urges the need for a cleansed, renewed inner life if outward behavior is to be reformed; the divine law must become a motivating force within a person if sin is to be overcome (Jer 31:29-34; Ez 36:24-29).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 51 offers a keen analysis of the inner meaning of sin. By affirming “in sin did my mother conceive me,” the psalmist confessed that his life had been sinful from the first. His whole personality needed “purging”; he was defiled. Ritual sacrifices offer no solution. Only a broken, contrite heart can prepare a sinner for God’s cleansing. The only hope, the sole ground of appeal, lies in God’s steadfast love and abundant mercy. In spite of its rigorous view of sin, the OT also contains gracious assurance of forgiveness (Ps 103:8-14 Is 1:18; 55:6-7).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJesusTeachings\">In Jesus’ Teachings<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ teachings on the subject of sin took up the gracious offer of divine forgiveness and renewal, not only proclaiming with authority, “Your sins are forgiven,” but showing many acts of compassion and social recognition that he came to be the friend of sinners, calling them to repentance, restoring their hope and dignity (Mt 9:1-13; 11:19; Lk 15; 19:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus said little about the origin of sin, except to trace it to the human heart and will (Mt 6:22-23; 7:17-19; 18:7; Mk 7:20-23), but he significantly redefined sin’s scope. Where the law could assess only people’s actions, Jesus showed that anger, contempt, lust, hardness of heart, and deceitfulness are also sinful. He also spoke of sins of neglect, good left undone, the barren tree, the unused talent, the priest ignoring the injured, and the love never shown (Mt 25:41-46). He especially condemns sins against love—unbrotherliness, implacable hostility, selfishness, insensitivity (Lk 12:16-21; 16:19-31). And he condemned self-righteousness and spiritual blindness (Mt 23:16-26; Mk 3:22-30). Jesus spoke of sin as sickness (Mk 2:17) and sometimes as folly (Lk 12:20). Nevertheless, Jesus declared that fallen humans can be cured with God’s help (7:36-50).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InJohnsWritings\">In John’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>John’s Gospel assumes sinful humanity’s need, the sacrifice of Christ the Lamb to bear away the sin of the world, and the offer of light and life in Christ. The new note is an emphasis on sin that refuses to accept the salvation provided in Christ, by the love of God for the world—the refusal to believe. It is for loving darkness, rejecting light, and refusing to accept Christ the Savior that humans are judged already (Jn 3:16-21).<\/p>\n<p>Against Gnosticism’s claim that for advanced Christians sin does not matter, 1 John affirms 15 reasons why sin cannot be tolerated in the Christian life and emphasizes again that sin is both ignorance of the truth and lack of love (1 Jn 3:3-10). Yet God forgives those who confess their sins, while Christ atones for their sins and intercedes for them (1:7–2:2).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InPaulsWritings\">In Paul’s Writings<\/p>\n<p>Paul argued strongly, from observation and from Scripture, that all have sinned (Rom 1–3). To him, sin is a force, a power, a “law” ruling within people (Rom 5:21; 7:23; 8:2; 1 Cor 15:56), producing all kinds of evil behavior—the hardening of the conscience (Rom 7:21-24), alienation from God, and subjection to death (Rom 5:10; 6:23; Eph 2:1-5, 12; Col 1:21). Humans are helpless to reform themselves (Rom 7:24). Paul’s explanation of this desperate, universal condition is variously interpreted. Some readers think that Romans 5:12-21 says that Adam’s sin is the source of all sin; others, that it is the “similitude” (<span>kjv<\/span>) of all sin. In any event, Paul essentially said that “every man is his own Adam,” which means that each person is fully responsible for his or her sinful condition, even if the sinful nature was inherited from Adam.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to sin, for Paul, lies in the believer’s death with Christ—death to sin, self, the world. Concurrently, the new life of the invasive, effusive Spirit transforms one’s life from within, making each person a new creation by sanctifying the personality into the likeness of Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-9; 6; 8:1-4, 28-29; 2 Cor 5:14-21).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Flesh; Justification, Justified; Sanctification; Sin unto Death; Unpardonable Sin, The.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","summary_en":"SIN Evildoing that is not only against humanity, society, others, or oneself, but against God. The concept of God, therefore, gives to the idea of sin its many-sided meaning. Other gods, conceived of as capricious and characterless, exercised unlimited power in unbridled behavior; they engendered no such sense of sin as did Israel’s one God, holy, righteous, and utterly good. This religious conception of wrongdoing with the terminology it created persists into the NT. Terminology Israel’s God...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":28142,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Offense Offend","title_en":"Offense Offend","content_ro":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>OFFEND, OFFENSE<\/h3>\n<p>Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DoingWrong\">Doing Wrong<\/p>\n<p>In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man.<\/p>\n<p>Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the people of Edom had grievously offended in taking vengeance on Judah, and so the hand of the Lord was against them in judgment (Ez 25:12-13). Israel commited an offense in their worship of Baal (Hos 13:1). The breaking of God’s law is spoken of as an “offense committed” (Dt 19:15; cf. 22:26; 25:2). In the NT, James (Jas 2:10; 3:2) speaks of offenses against God and against his law.<\/p>\n<p>There are many passages in the Bible addressing one man’s offense against another: for example, Abraham’s against Abimelech (Gn 20:9), or Pharaoh’s chief butler and chief baker against their master (40:1). Sometimes it is an alleged offense and no actual wrong has been done (e.g., Gn 31:36; 2 Kgs 18:14; Jer 37:18). Paul, in his defense before the Roman governor Festus, said, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended at all” (Acts 25:8, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Bible speaks about dealing with real offenses against God and people. Offenses should be acknowledged and confessed (Hos 5:15). One’s proper resolution before God is “I will not offend any more” (Jb 34:31, <span>rsv<\/span>). One needs to make amends for offenses (Eccl 10:4) and to forgive the offenses of others (Prv 17:9; 19:11). Jesus Christ died for our offenses (Rom 4:25; 5:15-21), so that in turning to him there is forgiveness for all sins.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CausingAnothertoSin\">Causing Another to Sin<\/p>\n<p>The noun “offense” and the verb “offend” are also used in reference to a person being caused to stumble or to do what is wrong. There are three ways in which this may happen:<\/p>\n<p>1. There may be something in the individual that causes him or her to stumble. Jesus expressed the seriousness of this, and though speaking metaphorically, he indicated the strenuous steps of prevention (Mt 5:29-30; 18:8-9).<\/p>\n<li>2. There may be something in a person that causes offense to others. Jesus said, “Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!” (Mt 18:7, <span>kjv<\/span>). There are, in fact, many NT passages that insist that one should live so as not to cause others to stumble (Rom 14:13). The apostle Paul says, “Don’t tear apart the work of God over what you eat. Remember, there is nothing wrong with these things in themselves. But it is wrong to eat anything if it makes another person stumble. Don’t eat meat or drink wine or do anything else if it might cause another Christian to stumble” (Rom 14:20-21, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. 1 Cor 10:32; 2 Cor 6:3).<\/li>\n<li>3. However, people may be offended at the truth through no fault of the person who presents it. Isaiah speaks of God as “a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall” (Is 8:14) in that people would not always accept his demands and the way of faith in him. The NT takes these same words and applies them to the offense of the gospel of Christ (Rom 9:32-33; 1 Pt 2:8). In the time of his ministry there were those who were offended at Jesus—at his lowly birth (Mt 13:57), at what he said and did (15:12), or because of the cost of following him (13:21). Even disciples were capable of being offended and turning aside (Jn 6:61). In the end all were offended and fled from him (Mt 26:31, 56). Finally, the apostle Paul spoke of the offense in the preaching of the cross of Christ. He could have chosen to preach a popular message and avoided persecution, a “message that doesn’t offend anyone” (Gal 5:11). He chose rather to preach the cross even though it was a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles (1 Cor 1:23).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Sin.<\/p>","summary_ro":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","summary_en":"OFFEND, OFFENSE Words used two ways in the Bible: doing what is wrong oneself, or causing someone else to do wrong or to stumble. Doing Wrong In both the Hebrew of the OT and the Greek of the NT there are several words for sin or wrongdoing having a variety of different translations. With the word “offend” or “offense,” the emphasis is on the sin being against a person or against the law, an offense against either God or man. Sin is fundamentally an offense against God. For example, the peopl...","source":"Articles\/O.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54846,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","summary_en":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82472,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","summary_en":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110098,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","summary_en":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137724,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:8-9<\/strong> Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever <em>causes you to sin<\/em> (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","summary_en":"18:8-9 Concern shifts to the individual: Get rid of whatever causes you to sin (see 5:29-30; Col 3:5-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60826,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88452,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116078,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143704,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Purge the Evil","title_en":"Purge the Evil","content_ro":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Purge the Evil<\/h3>\n<p>Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2).<\/p>\n<p>God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:14; Heb 12:28-29). Such cleansing is meant to heal the community of believers and deter others from rebelling against the Lord (Deut 17:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God’s judgment among his people was often immediate (see, e.g., Num 11:1-3; 16:1-50; Josh 7). God thus made his people keenly aware of his demand for obedience and of the penalty for those who did not comply.<\/p>\n<p>God’s retribution is now reserved for the future day of judgment, when the sins of the unrighteous will be exposed and judged (Rom 14:10; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27; 1 Pet 4:5). However, some instances of calamity can be understood as God’s judgment on his disobedient children (e.g., Acts 5:1-11; see 1 Cor 11:27-30). It is still a “terrible thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb 10:31).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 19:1-2; Deut 9:3-6; 13:5; 17:2-13; Josh 7:1-26; 2 Chr 34:3-8; Isa 1:24-26; 4:2-6; 33:14; Ezek 20:32-38; Matt 18:8-9; Acts 5:1-11; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 11:27-30; 2 Cor 5:10; Heb 9:27-28; 10:31; 12:28-29; Jas 5:19-20; 1 Pet 4:5<\/p>","summary_ro":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","summary_en":"Purge the Evil Sin is so abhorrent to God that it cannot coexist with him. The same should be true for his people. God is holy, and he expects his people to reflect his holiness (Lev 11:45; 19:2). God required severe measures to remove sin from the covenant community. God offered forgiveness, but only for the truly repentant; those who hardened their hearts could expect God’s judgment—a purging process that devours sinners and their sins and leaves nothing behind (see Deut 9:3; 13:5; Isa 33:1...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":8959,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Place of the Dead","title_en":"Place of the Dead","content_ro":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEAD, Place of the<\/h3>\n<p>Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, one descends to Sheol (often translated as “grave,” “hell,” “pit,” or simply “the dead”), which at times means merely that one is laid in a grave (Nm 16:30, 33), but more often indicates an underworld. The abode of the dead is pictured as a place beneath the earth to which one “goes down” (Gn 42:38; Prv 15:24; Ez 26:20) and as a place of gloomy darkness (Jb 10:21-22), silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17), and forgetfulness (Ps 88:12). God is not remembered there and his praises are never sung (Pss 6:5; 30:9; 115:17). Even God himself, it was believed, does not remember those who are there (Ps 88:5, 11; Is 38:18). The dead were seen as permanently cut off from contact with the Lord and from participating in his activity in history. Even though the border between life and death was considered fluid (as shown by a resurrection in 2 Kgs 4:32-37 and by Samuel’s ghost in 1 Sm 28:7-25), communication with the dead was forbidden to the Jews (Dt 18:11). (Worshiping the dead was a common practice in the nations surrounding Israel.)<\/p>\n<p>Although one’s fate in the underworld could not properly be called life, it was a kind of existence, perhaps even in the company of one’s countrymen and ancestors (Gn 25:8; Ez 32:17-30). The realm of the dead was not beyond the reach of God’s power (Ps 139:8; Am 9:2; Jon 2:2). Although Sheol was pictured as a hungry monster wolfing down the living (Prv 27:20; 30:16), God’s power could save one from its grasp (Pss 49:15; 86:13). By the end of the OT period, there was even hope that one would finally be delivered from Sheol (Jb 14:13-22; 19:25-27; Pss 49:15; 73:23-28), although only Daniel expressed that hope clearly (Dn 12:1-2). So although the ancient Hebrews never looked forward to death in the same way that the apostle Paul could in the NT (2 Cor 5:1-8; Phil 1:21-23), nevertheless they did come to understand that death was not a hopeless state.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheIntertestamentalWritings\">In the Intertestamental Writings<\/p>\n<p>Between the exile and the beginning of the NT period (586 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 30, overlapping with the end of the OT), contact with the religions of Persia and Greece stimulated the Jews to clarify their ideas about life after death. When the OT was translated into Greek, the Greek name for the underworld, “hades,” was used to translate the Hebrew “Sheol.” In the NT, hades was carried over to become the common name for the abode of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>Along with new names came new ideas. Many different notions circulated about the place of the dead. A common one appears in the pseudepigraphal 1 Enoch 22, where the dead are said to be kept in hollow places in a great mountain waiting for the final judgment. One relatively pleasant section was reserved for the righteous and one full of torments for the wicked. Other writers continued the OT concept of hades or Sheol as a place of separation from God and from happiness (Ecclus 14:12, 16; 17:27-28).<\/p>\n<p>During that period, the Jews also began to use a new term, “Gehenna” (Hebrew “Hinnom”), the name of a valley south of Jerusalem. The valley was noted in the OT period for the abomination of child sacrifices (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 23:10) and in the NT period for its smoldering garbage. Gehenna became a designation for the final place of the wicked dead, a place of fiery torment (1 Enoch 90:20-27; 2 Esd 7:70). Over against that place of punishment stood “paradise” (a Persian name for a pleasure garden), a place where the righteous would enjoy blessedness.<\/p>\n<p>All those concepts—hades, Gehenna, paradise—were molded by NT writers into forms most appropriate to the revelation of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Although the NT uses a variety of terms for the abode of the dead, it contains surprisingly few references to it—about 35 verses in all. Those passages are concentrated in the Gospels and the book of Revelation. The apostle Paul said a lot about heaven, but only Jesus and John said much about hell.<\/p>\n<p>The word “hades” is attributed to Jesus only once, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Lk 16:23). In that parable hades is a place of torment where the wicked go at death. The torment is described as a “flame” that afflicts a person physically despite bodily death. All comfort is refused to those in agony.<\/p>\n<p>Although the wicked go to hades as soon as they die, their ultimate destination is Gehenna, a place of fire and worms, both indicating corruption (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 18:9; Mk 9:48, quoting from Is 66:24). Jesus also referred to Gehenna as “the outer darkness” where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Mt 8:12; 22:13; 25:30). Evidently, after the final judgment, the wicked are sent there at the command of Christ (Jn 5:22, 27; Acts 10:42; 17:31; 2 Tm 4:1). That place of torment picks up the negative side of the OT concept of Sheol as a place of separation from God.<\/p>\n<p>As a preacher of repentance, Jesus stressed the danger of Gehenna. He had much less to say about the place of the righteous when they die. Ultimately, though, the righteous would enter into “the kingdom,” instead of Gehenna, after the last judgment (Mt 25:34). Jesus twice indicated that the righteous enter a blessed state immediately at death. Luke 16:22 refers to the dead Lazarus as being in “Abraham’s bosom,” a place of comfort and peace. Luke 23:43 calls the same place paradise in a promise that the dying thief would join Jesus there at death. Paul’s wording about paradise seems to align it with heaven (2 Cor 12:2-3), and John associates paradise with the new heaven and new earth (Rv 2:7; 21:1-2; 22:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>Paul and other writers of the NT epistles had little to say about the abode of the wicked dead. Paul spoke only in passing of “the abyss”—his term for the pit of Sheol (Rom 10:7). His reference to Christ’s descent to the “lower parts of the earth” (Eph 4:9) is probably only his way of saying that Christ, having died, went to the place of the dead. (“The lowest earth” was a term used by Jewish rabbis for Sheol\/hades\/Gehenna.) Peter spoke of Christ’s going in “spirit” after his death to some “prison” where he “preached to the spirits” (1 Pt 3:18-20). Interpretations of that passage differ. Some think that Christ entered hades and preached to the fallen angels of Noah’s day (“sons of God,” Gn 6:1-4), not that he preached to imprisoned human spirits. In 2 Peter 2:4 the prison for spirits (usually translated “hell”) comes from “Tartarus,” another Greek name for the underworld.<\/p>\n<p>Paul had much to say about the abode of the righteous dead. In his earliest letters he never mentioned their location, only that they would be resurrected (1 Cor 15; 1 Thes 4:13-17). After facing almost certain death himself (2 Cor 1:8-11), he began to discuss where the dead “went.” To die means to be with Christ, Paul said, and thus is better than life (Phil 1:23). To be “away from the body” is to be “at home with the Lord” (2 Cor 5:8). Paul probably meant that the righteous dead went directly to paradise to be with Jesus (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4, where Paul called paradise “the third heaven”). Death has absolutely no power to separate Christians from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). Instead, it brings them into the presence of God.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Revelation contains much about the abode of the dead, especially the wicked dead. It uses two names for that place: “the abyss,” the home or prison of all evil spirits; and “hades,” the name for the place of the human dead. From the abyss (or bottomless pit) come the demonic forms that torment humanity (Rv 9:1-11) and the satanic “beast,” who kills the two witnesses and carries the “great prostitute” on its back (11:7; 17). There Satan himself will be imprisoned (20:2-3). Jesus described it as a place prepared for the devil and his angels (cf. Mt 25:41). The good news for Christians is that the abyss, or hades, is not an autonomous realm. The book of Revelation begins with Jesus’ announcement that he has the keys to hades (Rv 1:18), and in the end he will force it to give up its dead (20:13). Until then, the key to the abyss is not in the hand of Satan, but hangs on a heavenly key ring to be distributed only to the messengers of God (9:1; 20:1). In the end, hades, death, and the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire (Gehenna), where they will suffer eternal torment (19:20; 20:10, 14-15; 21:8).<\/p>\n<p>John, the writer of the Revelation, agreed with Paul that the righteous will not share the fate of the wicked at death. Instead of going to hades, they go to heaven. The martyrs appear under the altar, calling to God to avenge them (Rv 6:9-11). In another image innumerable Christians appear before the throne of God, praising him (7:9-17). Those believers, shepherded by Christ himself, suffer no hunger, thirst, discomfort, or sorrow.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>In summary, the place of the dead began in the OT as an undifferentiated, hazy idea of a place of separation from life and God. Later writers came to see that instead of one place for all (Sheol), there must be two. According to Christian teaching, the wicked enter the underworld, hades, a place of torment, where they suffer until the time of judgment; ultimately they will be cast into Gehenna, the lake of fire. Christ—not the devil—is in control of hades, as he is of the rest of creation. The righteous do not go to hades, but go directly to paradise (“Abraham’s bosom” or heaven). There they are with Christ; faith has become sight, suffering has become blessedness, and prayer has become praise. Christians believe that death, although fearful as the “last enemy,” has no torment for them. It has no power to separate them from their Lord. Rather, it brings them face-to-face with the One they love.<\/p>\n<p>This meeting may occur as soon as one dies or as soon as one is resurrected—the intervening time is of no consequence, because it is nothing more than just a time of sleep. In other words, the very next experience after death for the believer will be that of meeting Christ.<\/p>\n<p>Both Old and New Testaments speak of death as sleep. Commonly in the OT, when a person dies, he is said to go to sleep with his fathers (e.g., Dt 31:16; 2 Sm 7:12). Jesus himself spoke of death as sleep (Mt 9:24; Jn 11:11). So did the apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:30; 15:20, 51; 1 Thes 4:14). At least in some of these references it would seem that it is the temporary nature of death that is the reason why it is spoken of as sleep. Even in the OT passage Daniel 12:2, it is said that death is a sleep, until the dead rise up—some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Gehenna; Hades; Heaven; Hell; Intermediate State; Paradise; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","summary_en":"DEAD, Place of the Term covering a number of descriptive biblical images of the whereabouts of those who have died. Those images include Sheol and “the pit” in the OT, plus hades, Gehenna, paradise, and “Abraham’s bosom” in the NT. As their understanding advanced, the Hebrews’ idea of what happens at death changed from rather hazy beginnings to a developed concept found in the NT. In the Old Testament The OT contains meager information about the dead. At death, according to some OT passages, ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":13369,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gehenna*","title_en":"Gehenna*","content_ro":"<h3>GEHENNA*<\/h3>\n<p>English transliteration of the Greek form of an Aramaic word, which is derived from the Hebrew phrase “the Valley of [the son(s) of] Hinnom.” The name properly designates a deep valley delimiting the territories of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8; 18:16). It is commonly identified with Wadi el-Rababi that runs from beneath the western wall of the Old City, forming a deep ravine south of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The place became notorious because of the idolatrous practices that were carried out there in the days of Judah’s kings Ahaz and Manasseh, especially involving the heinous crime of infant sacrifices associated with the Molech ceremonies (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 2 Chr 28:3; 33:6; Jer 19:6; 32:35). The spiritual reformation of King Josiah brought an end to these sinister proceedings (2 Kgs 23:10). The prophet Jeremiah referred to the valley in picturing God’s judgment upon his people (Jer 2:23; 7:30-32; 19:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, the valley appears to have been used for the burning of the city’s refuse and the dead bodies of criminals. Interestingly, a well-established tradition locates the scene of Judas’s suicide and the consequent purchase of the Potter’s Field on the south side of this valley.<\/p>\n<p>The ravine’s reputation for extreme wickedness gave rise, especially during the intertestamental period, to use of its name as a term for the place of final punishment for the wicked (1 Enoch 18:11-16; 27:1-3; 54:1ff.; 56:3-4; 90:26; 2 Esd 7:36; cf. Is 30:33; 66:24; Dn 7:10). Jesus himself utilizes the term to designate the final abode of the unrepentant wicked (Mt 5:22; 10:28; 18:9). Since Gehenna is a fiery abyss (Mk 9:43), it is also the lake of fire (Mt 13:42, 50; Rv 20:14-15) to which all the godless will ultimately be consigned (Mt 23:15, 33), together with Satan and his devils (Mt 25:41; Rv 19:20; 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>Gehenna must be carefully differentiated from other terms relative to the afterlife or final state. Whereas the OT “Sheol” and NT “hades” uniformly designate the temporary abode of the dead (before the last Day of Judgment), “Gehenna” specifies the final place where the wicked will suffer everlasting punishment (cf. Ps 49:14-15 with Mt 10:28). The Greek form “Tartarus” occurs only in 2 Peter 2:4 and identifies the particular abode of the angels who fell in the primeval satanic revolt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Death; Hades; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GEHENNA*<\/h3>\n<p>English transliteration of the Greek form of an Aramaic word, which is derived from the Hebrew phrase “the Valley of [the son(s) of] Hinnom.” The name properly designates a deep valley delimiting the territories of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8; 18:16). It is commonly identified with Wadi el-Rababi that runs from beneath the western wall of the Old City, forming a deep ravine south of Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>The place became notorious because of the idolatrous practices that were carried out there in the days of Judah’s kings Ahaz and Manasseh, especially involving the heinous crime of infant sacrifices associated with the Molech ceremonies (2 Kgs 16:3; 21:6; 2 Chr 28:3; 33:6; Jer 19:6; 32:35). The spiritual reformation of King Josiah brought an end to these sinister proceedings (2 Kgs 23:10). The prophet Jeremiah referred to the valley in picturing God’s judgment upon his people (Jer 2:23; 7:30-32; 19:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>Subsequently, the valley appears to have been used for the burning of the city’s refuse and the dead bodies of criminals. Interestingly, a well-established tradition locates the scene of Judas’s suicide and the consequent purchase of the Potter’s Field on the south side of this valley.<\/p>\n<p>The ravine’s reputation for extreme wickedness gave rise, especially during the intertestamental period, to use of its name as a term for the place of final punishment for the wicked (1 Enoch 18:11-16; 27:1-3; 54:1ff.; 56:3-4; 90:26; 2 Esd 7:36; cf. Is 30:33; 66:24; Dn 7:10). Jesus himself utilizes the term to designate the final abode of the unrepentant wicked (Mt 5:22; 10:28; 18:9). Since Gehenna is a fiery abyss (Mk 9:43), it is also the lake of fire (Mt 13:42, 50; Rv 20:14-15) to which all the godless will ultimately be consigned (Mt 23:15, 33), together with Satan and his devils (Mt 25:41; Rv 19:20; 20:10).<\/p>\n<p>Gehenna must be carefully differentiated from other terms relative to the afterlife or final state. Whereas the OT “Sheol” and NT “hades” uniformly designate the temporary abode of the dead (before the last Day of Judgment), “Gehenna” specifies the final place where the wicked will suffer everlasting punishment (cf. Ps 49:14-15 with Mt 10:28). The Greek form “Tartarus” occurs only in 2 Peter 2:4 and identifies the particular abode of the angels who fell in the primeval satanic revolt.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Death; Hades; Hell; Sheol.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GEHENNA* English transliteration of the Greek form of an Aramaic word, which is derived from the Hebrew phrase “the Valley of [the son(s) of] Hinnom.” The name properly designates a deep valley delimiting the territories of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8; 18:16). It is commonly identified with Wadi el-Rababi that runs from beneath the western wall of the Old City, forming a deep ravine south of Jerusalem. The place became notorious because of the idolatrous practices that were car...","summary_en":"GEHENNA* English transliteration of the Greek form of an Aramaic word, which is derived from the Hebrew phrase “the Valley of [the son(s) of] Hinnom.” The name properly designates a deep valley delimiting the territories of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Jos 15:8; 18:16). It is commonly identified with Wadi el-Rababi that runs from beneath the western wall of the Old City, forming a deep ravine south of Jerusalem. The place became notorious because of the idolatrous practices that were car...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":16160,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Hell","title_en":"Hell","content_ro":"<h3>HELL<\/h3>\n<p>Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>• The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionandDescription\">Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt 25:41). Evidently, those in hell experience everlasting separation from the Lord, never to see the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9). Those who worshiped the beast will be subject to continuous torment (Rv 14:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Other expressions that indicate that the final state of the wicked is eternal are these: “burn with unquenchable fire” (Mt 3:12); “to the unquenchable fire . . . where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:43, 48); there is sin that “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). When Scripture is understood properly, there is no hint anywhere of the termination of the terrible state of unbelievers in hell. Their doom is unending; there is a solemn finality about their miserable condition. (It is significant that the most descriptive and conclusive utterances about hell come from the lips of Jesus.)<\/p>\n<p>A summary of all Scripture that speaks of hell indicates that there is the loss and absence of all good, and the misery and torment of an evil conscience. The most terrifying aspect is the complete and deserved separation from God and from all that is pure, holy, and beautiful. In addition, there is the awareness of being under the wrath of God and of enduring the curse of a righteous sentence because of one’s sins that were consciously and voluntarily committed.<\/p>\n<p>Although the biblical descriptions of hell are stated in very physical and literal terms, the essential character of hell should not be conceived in or limited to designations such as the worm that devours, the stripes that are inflicted, the burning or being consumed by fire. This affirmation does not detract from the horror or the gravity of the situation in hell, because nothing could possibly be worse than separation from God and the torment of an evil conscience. Hell is hell for those who are there essentially because they are completely alienated from God, and wherever there is alienation from God, there is always estrangement from one’s fellows. This is the worst possible punishment to which anyone could be subject: to be totally and irrevocably cut off from God and to be at enmity with all those who are around oneself. Another painful consequence of such a condition is to be at odds with oneself—torn apart from within by an accusing sense of guilt and shame. This condition is one of total conflict: with God, one’s neighbors, and oneself. This is hell! If the descriptions of hell are figurative or symbolic, the conditions they represent are more intense and real than the figures of speech in which they are expressed.<\/p>\n<p>Punishment for sin is a persistent teaching of the Bible. The doctrine of judgment is as extensive as the Canon itself. Typical of such passages are Genesis 2:17; 3:17-19; 4:13; Leviticus 26:27-33; Psalm 149:7; Isaiah 3:11; Ezekiel 14:10; Amos 1:2–2:16; Zechariah 14:19; Matthew 25:41, 46; Luke 16:23-24; Romans 2:5-12; Galatians 6:7-8; Hebrews 10:29-31; and Revelation 20:11-15.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTerms\">Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word “Sheol” in the OT is predominantly used for “the grave, the pit, the place of the departed dead” (Gn 37:35; Jb 7:9; 14:13; 17:13-16; Pss 6:5; 16:10; 55:15; Prv 9:18; Eccl 9:10; Is 14:11; 38:10-12, 18). There does not seem to be a very clear distinction in the OT between the final destiny of the good and the evil. They all alike go to the grave, to the world below, a world of gloom, weariness, darkness, decay, and forgetfulness, where one is remote from God (Jb 10:20-22; Ps 88:3-6), yet accessible to him (Jb 26:6; Ps 138:8; Am 9:2). It is a place characterized by silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17) and rest (Jb 3:17). Other texts, however, seem to suggest some aspect of consciousness, hope, and communication in Sheol (Jb 14:13-15; 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Is 14:9-10; Ez 32:21). A few texts seem to suggest the threat of divine judgment after death (Pss 9:17; 55:15). On the whole, Sheol was regarded with dismay and foreboding (Dt 32:22; Is 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>It was not until the time of the postcanonical Jewish literature, the writings that were developed between the close of the OT and the beginning of NT times, that clear distinctions were made between the final destinies of the righteous and the unrighteous. The idea of separate divisions within Sheol for the good and the evil was developed. It is unmistakable that there was in Jewish thought, as reflected throughout the OT, a belief in a future and continued existence beyond death, however shadowy and indefinite the concept.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “hades” in the NT is used very similarly to “Sheol” in the OT. It was, in fact, used by the translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, for Sheol. It designated in general the place or state of the dead, the grave, or death itself. In some versions the word is not translated at all but is transliterated simply as “hades.” The NT is not always very explicit about the meaning of hades, other than what has just been described. Use of the word often does not reveal much about the specific condition of the dead. There are some passages, however, that indicate a distinct advance over the use of Sheol in the OT. One NT passage definitely describes hades as a place of evil and punishment of the wicked, and may appropriately be translated “hell” (Lk 16:23). In all other instances, hades indicates nothing more than the place of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “Gehenna” is used in a number of NT texts to designate the fiery place for punishment of sinners and is often translated “hell” or “the fires of hell” (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Jas 3:6). It is usually used in connection with the final judgment and often has the suggestion that the punishment spoken of is eternal. Gehenna is derived by transliteration from the Hebrew of the OT “valley of Hinnom” or the “valley of the son of Hinnom,” a ravine on the south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the center of idolatrous worship in which children were burned by fire as an offering to the heathen god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time of Josiah it became a place of abomination, polluted by dead men’s bones and rubbish (2 Kgs 23:10-14) and by the garbage and filth of Jerusalem dumped there. A fire burned continuously in this valley. It thus became a symbol of the unending fires of hell where the lost are consumed in torment. It was a symbol of judgment to be imposed on the idolatrous and disobedient (Jer 7:31-34; 32:35).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word used to designate hell or “the lower regions” is “Tartarus” (2 Pt 2:4), a classical word for the place of eternal punishment. The apostle Peter uses it for the fallen angels who were thrown into hell, “committed . . . to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>As noted above, there are, in addition to these terms, the very explicit and vivid phrases that clearly teach the doctrine of hell, as developed at the beginning of this article. The biblical doctrine is determined much more by these decisive phrases than by the somewhat indecisive but frequently used terms “Sheol” and “hades.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJusticeofEternalPunishment\">The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult for us to understand the righteous judgment of a holy God who, on one hand, hates all evil, yet, on the other hand, loves the evildoers enough to sacrifice his only Son for their salvation from sin. Divine wrath is the necessary reaction of a holy God who hates all that is contrary to his righteous nature. When the only remedy for human sin is rejected and all appeals of a loving, seeking God for the reconciliation of rebellious sinners are refused, there is no other course of action that God himself can pursue but to leave the sinner to his self-chosen destiny. Punishment for sin is then the inevitable and inescapable response of holiness to that which is morally opposite, and it must continue as long as the sinful condition requiring it continues. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that lost sinners in hell are capable of repentance and faith. If in this life they did not turn away from sin and receive Christ as Savior with all the favorable circumstances and opportunities afforded them on earth, it is unreasonable to think they will do so in the life to come. Punishment cannot come to an end until guilt and sin come to an end. When the sinner ultimately resists and rejects the work of the Holy Spirit whereby he is convicted of sin, there remains no more possibility of repentance or salvation. He has committed an eternal sin (Mk 3:29; Rv 22:11), which deserves eternal punishment.<\/p>\n<p>The impossibility of faith and repentance in hell is seen also from the tragic reality of the depraved will, conditioned and determined by its repeated rebellion against God. Sin reproduces itself in the will, and character tends to become irrevocably fixed. God responds to endless sinning with the necessary counterpart of endless punishment.<\/p>\n<p>If the question is raised, How can a loving God send people to an everlasting hell? it must be replied that God does not choose this destination for people; they freely choose it for themselves. God simply concurs in their self-chosen way and reveals the full consequences of their evil choice. It must always be remembered that God is not only loving; he is also holy and righteous. There must be some adequate reckoning with justice in the universe where a revolt against God has brought evil consequences of enormous proportions.<\/p>\n<p>While the duration of punishment in hell is eternal for all who have chosen that destiny for themselves, there are degrees of punishment proportional to the degrees of guilt of each individual. Only God is able to determine what those degrees are, and he will assign the consequences with perfect justice according to the responsibility of each one. Evidence of such gradations in future punishment is found in Scripture (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 12:47-48; Rv 20:12-13; cf. Ez 16:48-61). An obvious comparison is made in these texts between the differing intensities of punishment that are involved in the contrasting privileges, knowledge, and opportunities.<\/p>\n<p>From all that has been said, it should be obvious that a variety of nonbiblical views must be ruled out, however attractively they may be presented by their advocates and however popular they may be from time to time. Among these views are the erroneous, but sometimes persuasive, doctrines of universalism, annihilationism, and second probation. Universalism promotes the concept that God will save everyone in the end. Annihilationism teaches that hell is not a place of conscious suffering but of final extermination. And second probation is a notion that people can be delivered from hell. It must always be remembered that the Bible is our rule of faith for the doctrine of hell, however difficult the doctrine may seem for natural reason or for human sentiment. Scripture leaves no doubt about the terrible nature and the eternal duration of hell. Rejection or neglect of this doctrine will have dire effects upon the mission of the church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; Dead, Place of the; Death; Gehenna; Hades; Intermediate State; Sheol; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HELL<\/h3>\n<p>Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>• The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DefinitionandDescription\">Definition and Description<\/p>\n<p>Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt 25:41). Evidently, those in hell experience everlasting separation from the Lord, never to see the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9). Those who worshiped the beast will be subject to continuous torment (Rv 14:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>Other expressions that indicate that the final state of the wicked is eternal are these: “burn with unquenchable fire” (Mt 3:12); “to the unquenchable fire . . . where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mk 9:43, 48); there is sin that “will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Mt 12:32, <span>rsv<\/span>). When Scripture is understood properly, there is no hint anywhere of the termination of the terrible state of unbelievers in hell. Their doom is unending; there is a solemn finality about their miserable condition. (It is significant that the most descriptive and conclusive utterances about hell come from the lips of Jesus.)<\/p>\n<p>A summary of all Scripture that speaks of hell indicates that there is the loss and absence of all good, and the misery and torment of an evil conscience. The most terrifying aspect is the complete and deserved separation from God and from all that is pure, holy, and beautiful. In addition, there is the awareness of being under the wrath of God and of enduring the curse of a righteous sentence because of one’s sins that were consciously and voluntarily committed.<\/p>\n<p>Although the biblical descriptions of hell are stated in very physical and literal terms, the essential character of hell should not be conceived in or limited to designations such as the worm that devours, the stripes that are inflicted, the burning or being consumed by fire. This affirmation does not detract from the horror or the gravity of the situation in hell, because nothing could possibly be worse than separation from God and the torment of an evil conscience. Hell is hell for those who are there essentially because they are completely alienated from God, and wherever there is alienation from God, there is always estrangement from one’s fellows. This is the worst possible punishment to which anyone could be subject: to be totally and irrevocably cut off from God and to be at enmity with all those who are around oneself. Another painful consequence of such a condition is to be at odds with oneself—torn apart from within by an accusing sense of guilt and shame. This condition is one of total conflict: with God, one’s neighbors, and oneself. This is hell! If the descriptions of hell are figurative or symbolic, the conditions they represent are more intense and real than the figures of speech in which they are expressed.<\/p>\n<p>Punishment for sin is a persistent teaching of the Bible. The doctrine of judgment is as extensive as the Canon itself. Typical of such passages are Genesis 2:17; 3:17-19; 4:13; Leviticus 26:27-33; Psalm 149:7; Isaiah 3:11; Ezekiel 14:10; Amos 1:2–2:16; Zechariah 14:19; Matthew 25:41, 46; Luke 16:23-24; Romans 2:5-12; Galatians 6:7-8; Hebrews 10:29-31; and Revelation 20:11-15.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTerms\">Biblical Terms<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew word “Sheol” in the OT is predominantly used for “the grave, the pit, the place of the departed dead” (Gn 37:35; Jb 7:9; 14:13; 17:13-16; Pss 6:5; 16:10; 55:15; Prv 9:18; Eccl 9:10; Is 14:11; 38:10-12, 18). There does not seem to be a very clear distinction in the OT between the final destiny of the good and the evil. They all alike go to the grave, to the world below, a world of gloom, weariness, darkness, decay, and forgetfulness, where one is remote from God (Jb 10:20-22; Ps 88:3-6), yet accessible to him (Jb 26:6; Ps 138:8; Am 9:2). It is a place characterized by silence (Pss 94:17; 115:17) and rest (Jb 3:17). Other texts, however, seem to suggest some aspect of consciousness, hope, and communication in Sheol (Jb 14:13-15; 19:25-27; Pss 16:10; 49:15; Is 14:9-10; Ez 32:21). A few texts seem to suggest the threat of divine judgment after death (Pss 9:17; 55:15). On the whole, Sheol was regarded with dismay and foreboding (Dt 32:22; Is 38:18).<\/p>\n<p>It was not until the time of the postcanonical Jewish literature, the writings that were developed between the close of the OT and the beginning of NT times, that clear distinctions were made between the final destinies of the righteous and the unrighteous. The idea of separate divisions within Sheol for the good and the evil was developed. It is unmistakable that there was in Jewish thought, as reflected throughout the OT, a belief in a future and continued existence beyond death, however shadowy and indefinite the concept.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “hades” in the NT is used very similarly to “Sheol” in the OT. It was, in fact, used by the translators of the Septuagint, the Greek version of the OT, for Sheol. It designated in general the place or state of the dead, the grave, or death itself. In some versions the word is not translated at all but is transliterated simply as “hades.” The NT is not always very explicit about the meaning of hades, other than what has just been described. Use of the word often does not reveal much about the specific condition of the dead. There are some passages, however, that indicate a distinct advance over the use of Sheol in the OT. One NT passage definitely describes hades as a place of evil and punishment of the wicked, and may appropriately be translated “hell” (Lk 16:23). In all other instances, hades indicates nothing more than the place of the dead.<\/p>\n<p>The Greek word “Gehenna” is used in a number of NT texts to designate the fiery place for punishment of sinners and is often translated “hell” or “the fires of hell” (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15, 33; Mk 9:43, 45, 47; Jas 3:6). It is usually used in connection with the final judgment and often has the suggestion that the punishment spoken of is eternal. Gehenna is derived by transliteration from the Hebrew of the OT “valley of Hinnom” or the “valley of the son of Hinnom,” a ravine on the south side of Jerusalem. This valley was the center of idolatrous worship in which children were burned by fire as an offering to the heathen god Molech (2 Chr 28:3; 33:6). In the time of Josiah it became a place of abomination, polluted by dead men’s bones and rubbish (2 Kgs 23:10-14) and by the garbage and filth of Jerusalem dumped there. A fire burned continuously in this valley. It thus became a symbol of the unending fires of hell where the lost are consumed in torment. It was a symbol of judgment to be imposed on the idolatrous and disobedient (Jer 7:31-34; 32:35).<\/p>\n<p>Another Greek word used to designate hell or “the lower regions” is “Tartarus” (2 Pt 2:4), a classical word for the place of eternal punishment. The apostle Peter uses it for the fallen angels who were thrown into hell, “committed . . . to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>As noted above, there are, in addition to these terms, the very explicit and vivid phrases that clearly teach the doctrine of hell, as developed at the beginning of this article. The biblical doctrine is determined much more by these decisive phrases than by the somewhat indecisive but frequently used terms “Sheol” and “hades.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheJusticeofEternalPunishment\">The Justice of Eternal Punishment<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult for us to understand the righteous judgment of a holy God who, on one hand, hates all evil, yet, on the other hand, loves the evildoers enough to sacrifice his only Son for their salvation from sin. Divine wrath is the necessary reaction of a holy God who hates all that is contrary to his righteous nature. When the only remedy for human sin is rejected and all appeals of a loving, seeking God for the reconciliation of rebellious sinners are refused, there is no other course of action that God himself can pursue but to leave the sinner to his self-chosen destiny. Punishment for sin is then the inevitable and inescapable response of holiness to that which is morally opposite, and it must continue as long as the sinful condition requiring it continues. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that lost sinners in hell are capable of repentance and faith. If in this life they did not turn away from sin and receive Christ as Savior with all the favorable circumstances and opportunities afforded them on earth, it is unreasonable to think they will do so in the life to come. Punishment cannot come to an end until guilt and sin come to an end. When the sinner ultimately resists and rejects the work of the Holy Spirit whereby he is convicted of sin, there remains no more possibility of repentance or salvation. He has committed an eternal sin (Mk 3:29; Rv 22:11), which deserves eternal punishment.<\/p>\n<p>The impossibility of faith and repentance in hell is seen also from the tragic reality of the depraved will, conditioned and determined by its repeated rebellion against God. Sin reproduces itself in the will, and character tends to become irrevocably fixed. God responds to endless sinning with the necessary counterpart of endless punishment.<\/p>\n<p>If the question is raised, How can a loving God send people to an everlasting hell? it must be replied that God does not choose this destination for people; they freely choose it for themselves. God simply concurs in their self-chosen way and reveals the full consequences of their evil choice. It must always be remembered that God is not only loving; he is also holy and righteous. There must be some adequate reckoning with justice in the universe where a revolt against God has brought evil consequences of enormous proportions.<\/p>\n<p>While the duration of punishment in hell is eternal for all who have chosen that destiny for themselves, there are degrees of punishment proportional to the degrees of guilt of each individual. Only God is able to determine what those degrees are, and he will assign the consequences with perfect justice according to the responsibility of each one. Evidence of such gradations in future punishment is found in Scripture (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 12:47-48; Rv 20:12-13; cf. Ez 16:48-61). An obvious comparison is made in these texts between the differing intensities of punishment that are involved in the contrasting privileges, knowledge, and opportunities.<\/p>\n<p>From all that has been said, it should be obvious that a variety of nonbiblical views must be ruled out, however attractively they may be presented by their advocates and however popular they may be from time to time. Among these views are the erroneous, but sometimes persuasive, doctrines of universalism, annihilationism, and second probation. Universalism promotes the concept that God will save everyone in the end. Annihilationism teaches that hell is not a place of conscious suffering but of final extermination. And second probation is a notion that people can be delivered from hell. It must always be remembered that the Bible is our rule of faith for the doctrine of hell, however difficult the doctrine may seem for natural reason or for human sentiment. Scripture leaves no doubt about the terrible nature and the eternal duration of hell. Rejection or neglect of this doctrine will have dire effects upon the mission of the church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> “Abraham’s Bosom”; Dead, Place of the; Death; Gehenna; Hades; Intermediate State; Sheol; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"HELL Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead. Preview • Definition and Description • Biblical Terms • The Justice of Eternal Punishment Definition and Description Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt...","summary_en":"HELL Place of future punishment for the lost, unrepentant, wicked dead. Preview • Definition and Description • Biblical Terms • The Justice of Eternal Punishment Definition and Description Hell is the final destiny of unbelievers and is variously described by the figures of a furnace of fire, eternal fire, eternal punishment (Mt 13:42, 50; 25:41, 46); outer darkness, the place of weeping and torment (8:12); the lake of fire, the second death (Rv 21:8); a place for the devil and his demons (Mt...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":37555,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Topheth","title_en":"Topheth","content_ro":"<h3>TOPHETH<\/h3>\n<p>Location within the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem where Israel profaned the Lord by offering human sacrifices to Molech. As part of his religious reform, Josiah defiled Topheth and tore down its altars (2 Kgs 23:10). Josiah’s reforms appear to have had only temporary impact, for the practice recurred under Manasseh (2 Chr 33:6) and was later condemned by Jeremiah (Jer 7:31-32). Jeremiah prophesied that the valley would be renamed the “Valley of Slaughter” because it would be the site where the Babylonians would rout Judah during their siege of Jerusalem. Jeremiah repeated the prophecy during his parable of the potter’s flask, emphasizing the fact that Jerusalem would be destroyed so thoroughly that it would resemble Topheth (19:12). By this time, Topheth had evidently become a sort of city dump where broken pottery was thrown away and where burials that could not be accommodated in any of the city cemeteries would take place (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>While Topheth is not mentioned in the NT, it is linked to Gehenna (Aramaic form of “valley of Hinnom”). Gehenna refers to the place of destruction and is typically translated “hell” in the NT (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; Mk 9:43-47; Lk 12:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>TOPHETH<\/h3>\n<p>Location within the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem where Israel profaned the Lord by offering human sacrifices to Molech. As part of his religious reform, Josiah defiled Topheth and tore down its altars (2 Kgs 23:10). Josiah’s reforms appear to have had only temporary impact, for the practice recurred under Manasseh (2 Chr 33:6) and was later condemned by Jeremiah (Jer 7:31-32). Jeremiah prophesied that the valley would be renamed the “Valley of Slaughter” because it would be the site where the Babylonians would rout Judah during their siege of Jerusalem. Jeremiah repeated the prophecy during his parable of the potter’s flask, emphasizing the fact that Jerusalem would be destroyed so thoroughly that it would resemble Topheth (19:12). By this time, Topheth had evidently become a sort of city dump where broken pottery was thrown away and where burials that could not be accommodated in any of the city cemeteries would take place (v 11).<\/p>\n<p>While Topheth is not mentioned in the NT, it is linked to Gehenna (Aramaic form of “valley of Hinnom”). Gehenna refers to the place of destruction and is typically translated “hell” in the NT (Mt 5:22, 29-30; 10:28; 18:9; Mk 9:43-47; Lk 12:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"TOPHETH Location within the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem where Israel profaned the Lord by offering human sacrifices to Molech. As part of his religious reform, Josiah defiled Topheth and tore down its altars (2 Kgs 23:10). Josiah’s reforms appear to have had only temporary impact, for the practice recurred under Manasseh (2 Chr 33:6) and was later condemned by Jeremiah (Jer 7:31-32). Jeremiah prophesied that the valley would be renamed the “Valley of Slaughter” because it would be the ...","summary_en":"TOPHETH Location within the valley of Hinnom outside Jerusalem where Israel profaned the Lord by offering human sacrifices to Molech. As part of his religious reform, Josiah defiled Topheth and tore down its altars (2 Kgs 23:10). Josiah’s reforms appear to have had only temporary impact, for the practice recurred under Manasseh (2 Chr 33:6) and was later condemned by Jeremiah (Jer 7:31-32). Jeremiah prophesied that the valley would be renamed the “Valley of Slaughter” because it would be the ...","source":"Articles\/T.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":1641,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Angel","title_en":"Angel","content_ro":"<h3>ANGEL<\/h3>\n<p>Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess.<\/p>\n<p>The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jerusalem (Ez 41:18-20). Two angels, Gabriel and the chief, or archangel, Michael, are named in the Bible (Dn 8:16; 9:21; 10:13; Lk 1:19, 26; Jude 1:9; Rv 12:7-9).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the Bible, angels are spiritual beings who serve primarily as messengers. The English word “angel” comes directly from a Greek word for messenger. In Luke 9:52, Jesus sent “messengers” ahead of him. Usually the same word is translated “angel” and is understood to mean a spiritual messenger from God. In the OT also, one Hebrew word can refer either to a human messenger or to a spiritual being. It is not always immediately clear which is meant, especially since angels sometimes appeared in human form. In certain passages, “the angel of God” or a similar phrase may refer to God delivering his own message (see Gn 18:2-15).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appeared to many of God’s people in the Bible to announce good news (Jgs 13:3), warn of danger (Gn 19:15), guard from evil (Dn 3:28; 6:22), guide and protect (Ex 14:19), nourish (Gn 21:14-20; 1 Kgs 19:4-7), or instruct (Acts 7:38; Gal 3:19). When Christ came to earth as the Savior, angels heralded his birth (Lk 2:8-15), guided and warned his parents (Mt 2:13), strengthened him when he was tempted (Mt 4:11) and in his last distress (Lk 22:43-44 in some manuscripts), and observed his resurrection (Mt 28:1-6). Jesus spoke about the guardian angels of little children (Mt 18:10). Philip was guided by an angel (Acts 8:26). Apostles were rescued from prison by an angel (Acts 5:19; 12:7-11). In a frightening situation, the apostle Paul was encouraged by an angel (Acts 27:21-25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The physical appearance of angels in biblical encounters was often unusual enough to distinguish them from ordinary people. The angel who moved the stone from the entrance to Jesus’ tomb had an appearance like lightning and raiment white as snow (Mt 28:3). Many passages about angels are descriptions of dreams or visions. “Jacob’s ladder” with angels ascending and descending (Gn 28:12) is an example. In another dream an angel spoke to Jacob (Gn 31:11). An angel appeared to Cornelius in a vision (Acts 10:1-3). Major passages of this type include Isaiah 6 (the seraphim), much of the book of Ezekiel (the cherubim), and much of Daniel and Zechariah. In the NT, over a third of the references to angels are in the book of Revelation. In most cases there, the angelic beings are glorious or grotesque figures seen in visions and are not to be confused with human persons. The language describing such visions is appropriately mystical, or at least metaphorical and difficult to interpret.<\/p>\n<p>Angelology, or the doctrine of angels, is not a major theme in Christian theology in spite of the many references to angels in the Bible. Angels are included in descriptions of all that God created (Ps 148:2; Col 1:16). There are hints that they witnessed the creation of the world (Jb 38:7). No matter how close to God angels may be, they share with humankind the status of creatures. But as wholly spiritual creatures they are free from many human limitations, such as death (Lk 20:36). They do not marry (Mt 22:30), so they could be regarded as sexless. In all their appearances, angels in human form were taken to be men, never women or children. Their ability to communicate in human language and to affect human life in other ways is basic to their role in the Bible. Their power and awesome appearance (Mt 28:2-4) sometimes tempted people to fear or worship them, but the NT does not condone the worship of angels (Col 2:18; Rv 22:8-9). Though angels are stronger and wiser than human beings, their power and knowledge are also limited by God (Ps 103:20; Mt 24:36; 1 Pt 1:11-12; 2 Pt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Cherub, Cherubim; Seraph, Seraphim; Demon; Demon-possession; Satan.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ANGEL<\/h3>\n<p>Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess.<\/p>\n<p>The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jerusalem (Ez 41:18-20). Two angels, Gabriel and the chief, or archangel, Michael, are named in the Bible (Dn 8:16; 9:21; 10:13; Lk 1:19, 26; Jude 1:9; Rv 12:7-9).<\/p>\n\n<p>In the Bible, angels are spiritual beings who serve primarily as messengers. The English word “angel” comes directly from a Greek word for messenger. In Luke 9:52, Jesus sent “messengers” ahead of him. Usually the same word is translated “angel” and is understood to mean a spiritual messenger from God. In the OT also, one Hebrew word can refer either to a human messenger or to a spiritual being. It is not always immediately clear which is meant, especially since angels sometimes appeared in human form. In certain passages, “the angel of God” or a similar phrase may refer to God delivering his own message (see Gn 18:2-15).<\/p>\n<p>Angels appeared to many of God’s people in the Bible to announce good news (Jgs 13:3), warn of danger (Gn 19:15), guard from evil (Dn 3:28; 6:22), guide and protect (Ex 14:19), nourish (Gn 21:14-20; 1 Kgs 19:4-7), or instruct (Acts 7:38; Gal 3:19). When Christ came to earth as the Savior, angels heralded his birth (Lk 2:8-15), guided and warned his parents (Mt 2:13), strengthened him when he was tempted (Mt 4:11) and in his last distress (Lk 22:43-44 in some manuscripts), and observed his resurrection (Mt 28:1-6). Jesus spoke about the guardian angels of little children (Mt 18:10). Philip was guided by an angel (Acts 8:26). Apostles were rescued from prison by an angel (Acts 5:19; 12:7-11). In a frightening situation, the apostle Paul was encouraged by an angel (Acts 27:21-25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The physical appearance of angels in biblical encounters was often unusual enough to distinguish them from ordinary people. The angel who moved the stone from the entrance to Jesus’ tomb had an appearance like lightning and raiment white as snow (Mt 28:3). Many passages about angels are descriptions of dreams or visions. “Jacob’s ladder” with angels ascending and descending (Gn 28:12) is an example. In another dream an angel spoke to Jacob (Gn 31:11). An angel appeared to Cornelius in a vision (Acts 10:1-3). Major passages of this type include Isaiah 6 (the seraphim), much of the book of Ezekiel (the cherubim), and much of Daniel and Zechariah. In the NT, over a third of the references to angels are in the book of Revelation. In most cases there, the angelic beings are glorious or grotesque figures seen in visions and are not to be confused with human persons. The language describing such visions is appropriately mystical, or at least metaphorical and difficult to interpret.<\/p>\n<p>Angelology, or the doctrine of angels, is not a major theme in Christian theology in spite of the many references to angels in the Bible. Angels are included in descriptions of all that God created (Ps 148:2; Col 1:16). There are hints that they witnessed the creation of the world (Jb 38:7). No matter how close to God angels may be, they share with humankind the status of creatures. But as wholly spiritual creatures they are free from many human limitations, such as death (Lk 20:36). They do not marry (Mt 22:30), so they could be regarded as sexless. In all their appearances, angels in human form were taken to be men, never women or children. Their ability to communicate in human language and to affect human life in other ways is basic to their role in the Bible. Their power and awesome appearance (Mt 28:2-4) sometimes tempted people to fear or worship them, but the NT does not condone the worship of angels (Col 2:18; Rv 22:8-9). Though angels are stronger and wiser than human beings, their power and knowledge are also limited by God (Ps 103:20; Mt 24:36; 1 Pt 1:11-12; 2 Pt 2:11). <em>See<\/em> Cherub, Cherubim; Seraph, Seraphim; Demon; Demon-possession; Satan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ANGEL Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess. The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jer...","summary_en":"ANGEL Messenger of God or supernatural being, either good or evil, with powers greater than humans possess. The first kind of angels mentioned in the Bible are cherubim (plural of “cherub,” a Hebrew word). They were celestial beings sent by God to guard the tree of life in the Garden of Eden (Gn 3:24). They were represented symbolically on the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), in the tabernacle (Ex 26:31) and temple (2 Chr 3:7), and seen by the prophet Ezekiel in a vision of the restored Jer...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24791,"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":34976,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shepherd","title_en":"Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\n<p>One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\n<p>One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","summary_en":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54847,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","summary_en":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82473,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","summary_en":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110099,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","summary_en":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137725,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:10","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:10<\/strong> <em>Don’t look down on<\/em> them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • <em>their angels:<\/em> See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","summary_en":"18:10 Don’t look down on them, either by refusing to receive them (18:5-6) or by refusing to give pastoral care when needed (18:12-14; see 19:13-15). • their angels: See 4:5-7; Heb 1:14.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66650,"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":94276,"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":121902,"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":149528,"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}],"12":[{"id":34974,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Shepherd","title_en":"Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\n<p>One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SHEPHERD<\/h3>\n<p>One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4).<\/p>\n<p>The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:20). The analogy of the shepherd and the flock finds rich expression in Psalm 23, Ezekiel 34, and John 10. God was the Shepherd of Israel (Gn 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Is 40:11). When unfaithful shepherds failed Israel, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd over them (Ez 34:11-16, 23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT imagery comes from an OT and Palestinian background. In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a responsible position. Great flocks had to be moved from place to place, and it was necessary that they be guarded from wild animals and robbers. Because of the fundamental role of shepherding in the ancient world, the word “shepherd” became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This imagery formed the background for the OT, where the same usage is found. God is pictured as the shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare. Rulers and leaders of the people are often referred to as shepherds (Nm 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 12:10; 22:22; 23:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>By the time of Jeremiah, “shepherd” began to be used as a title for the coming Messiah. God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ez 34:11-22) and promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). He explicitly promised that he would be their God and would set the messianic Son of David as shepherd over them (Ez 34:23-24). In the NT Jesus referred to himself as the promised messianic Shepherd (Mt 10:16; 25:32; Mk 14:27; Jn 10:1-30; cf. Heb 13:20; 1 Pt 2:25). Ephesians 4:11 speaks of leaders of the church as shepherds or pastors, and this usage continued in the early church and down until the present day. Paul said they are special people given to the church by God to care for God’s people as a shepherd does his sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. Peter also spoke of the leaders as shepherds; he encouraged them to remain faithful shepherds until the time that the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appeared (1 Pt 5:1-4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","summary_en":"SHEPHERD One who took complete care of a flock of sheep. His task was to find grass and water for the sheep, to protect them from wild animals (Am 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ez 34:8; Mt 18:12), to lead the flock out of the fold each day, and to return the flock to the fold at the close of the day (Jn 10:2-4). The figure of the shepherd and his sheep is important in the NT. Jesus is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (Mt 18:10-14; Mk 6:34; Jn 10; Heb 13:...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54848,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","summary_en":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82474,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","summary_en":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110100,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","summary_en":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137726,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:12","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:12<\/strong> Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost <em>sheep<\/em><em>,<\/em> the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","summary_en":"18:12 Just as a shepherd will work to recover a lost sheep, the “little ones” (18:6) must not be despised or neglected.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62721,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":90347,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117973,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145599,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Shepherd","title_en":"The Shepherd","content_ro":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Shepherd<\/h3>\n<p>In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening.<\/p>\n<p>The word <em>shepherd<\/em> became a common term for a ruler. The kings of Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt were often referred to as shepherds who protected their people. This metaphorical use is also prevalent in the Old Testament (Num 27:17; 1 Kgs 22:17; Jer 10:21; 23:1-2; Ezek 34:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, God is pictured as the Shepherd of Israel, concerned for every aspect of his people’s welfare (Gen 49:24; Pss 23:1; 80:1; Isa 40:11). God himself would provide for his flock (Jer 23:3; 31:10; Ezek 34:11-22), and he promised to provide faithful shepherds who showed concern for his people (Jer 3:15; 23:4). When Israel’s early leaders proved to be unfaithful shepherds, God intervened and appointed his servant David as a faithful shepherd to lead them. He later promised that he would establish David’s offspring as shepherd over them (see Ezek 34:23-24). By the time of the prophet Jeremiah, <em>shepherd<\/em> began to be used with reference to the coming Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, Jesus referred to himself as the Shepherd (Matt 25:31-33; Mark 14:27; John 10:1-30). He is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for the sheep (John 10:11-18; see also Heb 13:20).<\/p>\n<p>The leaders of the church are also called shepherds (Eph 4:11, translated “pastors”)—God gives them to the church to care for his people as a shepherd does their sheep, leading and teaching them in the ways of God. They are to be faithful shepherds until the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ, appears to lead his people directly (1 Pet 5:1-4).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 29:1-10; Num 27:16-18; 2 Sam 7:7; 1 Kgs 22:17; 1 Chr 11:2; Pss 23:1-6; 77:20; 80:1; Isa 40:11; 44:28; 56:10-11; Jer 10:21; 25:34-36; Ezek 34:1-31; Mic 7:14; Zech 10:2b-3; 11:4-17; 13:7; Matt 2:6; 18:12-14; 26:31; John 10:1-16; 1 Pet 2:25; 5:1-4; Jude 1:12; Rev 7:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","summary_en":"The Shepherd In the Jewish economy, the shepherd who tended a flock of sheep or goats held a position of importance. Shepherding was fundamental to ancient Near Eastern society. The shepherd’s task was to lead the flock out of the fold each morning (John 10:2-4), to find grass and water for the flock, to protect them from wild animals (Amos 3:12), to look for and restore those that strayed (Ezek 34:8; Matt 18:12), and to return the flock to the fold every evening. The word shepherd became a c...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"13":[{"id":20922,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Joy","title_en":"Joy","content_ro":"<h3>JOY<\/h3>\n<p>Positive human condition that can be either feeling or action. The Bible uses “joy” in both senses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoyasaFeeling\">Joy as a Feeling<\/p>\n<p>Joy is a feeling called forth by well-being, success, or good fortune. A person automatically experiences it because of certain favorable circumstances. It cannot be commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The shepherd experienced joy when he found his lost sheep (Mt 18:13). The multitude felt it when Jesus healed a Jewish woman whom Satan had bound for 18 years (Lk 13:17). The disciples returned to Jerusalem rejoicing after Jesus’ ascension (24:52). Joy was also the feeling of the church at Antioch when its members heard the Jerusalem Council’s decision that they did not have to be circumcised to keep God’s law (Acts 15:31). Paul mentioned his joy in hearing about the obedience of the Roman Christians (Rom 16:19). He wrote to the Corinthians that love does not rejoice in wrong but rejoices in the right (1 Cor 13:6; see also 1 Sm 2:1; 11:9; 18:6; 2 Sm 6:12; 1 Kgs 1:40; Est 9:17-22).<\/p>\n<p>Psalms 137:1-6 shows that the emotion cannot be commanded. The Jews’ captors wanted them to sing in the land of their exile, something they were unable to do. Faraway Jerusalem was their chief joy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoyasanAction\">Joy as an Action<\/p>\n<p>There is a joy that Scripture commands. That joy is action that can be engaged in regardless of how the person feels. Proverbs 5:18 tells the reader to rejoice in the wife of his youth, without reference to what she may be like. Christ instructed his disciples to rejoice when they were persecuted, reviled, and slandered (Mt 5:11-12). The apostle Paul commanded continuous rejoicing (Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16). James said Christians are to reckon it all joy when they fall into various testings because such testings produce endurance (Jas 1:2). Joy in adverse circumstances is possible only as a fruit of the Holy Spirit, who is present in every Christian (Gal 5:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Fruit of the Spirit.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOY<\/h3>\n<p>Positive human condition that can be either feeling or action. The Bible uses “joy” in both senses.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoyasaFeeling\">Joy as a Feeling<\/p>\n<p>Joy is a feeling called forth by well-being, success, or good fortune. A person automatically experiences it because of certain favorable circumstances. It cannot be commanded.<\/p>\n<p>The shepherd experienced joy when he found his lost sheep (Mt 18:13). The multitude felt it when Jesus healed a Jewish woman whom Satan had bound for 18 years (Lk 13:17). The disciples returned to Jerusalem rejoicing after Jesus’ ascension (24:52). Joy was also the feeling of the church at Antioch when its members heard the Jerusalem Council’s decision that they did not have to be circumcised to keep God’s law (Acts 15:31). Paul mentioned his joy in hearing about the obedience of the Roman Christians (Rom 16:19). He wrote to the Corinthians that love does not rejoice in wrong but rejoices in the right (1 Cor 13:6; see also 1 Sm 2:1; 11:9; 18:6; 2 Sm 6:12; 1 Kgs 1:40; Est 9:17-22).<\/p>\n<p>Psalms 137:1-6 shows that the emotion cannot be commanded. The Jews’ captors wanted them to sing in the land of their exile, something they were unable to do. Faraway Jerusalem was their chief joy.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JoyasanAction\">Joy as an Action<\/p>\n<p>There is a joy that Scripture commands. That joy is action that can be engaged in regardless of how the person feels. Proverbs 5:18 tells the reader to rejoice in the wife of his youth, without reference to what she may be like. Christ instructed his disciples to rejoice when they were persecuted, reviled, and slandered (Mt 5:11-12). The apostle Paul commanded continuous rejoicing (Phil 4:4; 1 Thes 5:16). James said Christians are to reckon it all joy when they fall into various testings because such testings produce endurance (Jas 1:2). Joy in adverse circumstances is possible only as a fruit of the Holy Spirit, who is present in every Christian (Gal 5:22).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Fruit of the Spirit.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOY Positive human condition that can be either feeling or action. The Bible uses “joy” in both senses. Joy as a Feeling Joy is a feeling called forth by well-being, success, or good fortune. A person automatically experiences it because of certain favorable circumstances. It cannot be commanded. The shepherd experienced joy when he found his lost sheep (Mt 18:13). The multitude felt it when Jesus healed a Jewish woman whom Satan had bound for 18 years (Lk 13:17). The disciples returned to Je...","summary_en":"JOY Positive human condition that can be either feeling or action. The Bible uses “joy” in both senses. Joy as a Feeling Joy is a feeling called forth by well-being, success, or good fortune. A person automatically experiences it because of certain favorable circumstances. It cannot be commanded. The shepherd experienced joy when he found his lost sheep (Mt 18:13). The multitude felt it when Jesus healed a Jewish woman whom Satan had bound for 18 years (Lk 13:17). The disciples returned to Je...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":54849,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","summary_en":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82475,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","summary_en":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110101,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","summary_en":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137727,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:14","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:14<\/strong> The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","summary_en":"18:14 The shepherd’s joy is also the joy of the Father; the purpose of pastoral care is so God will not lose any of his sheep.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":5778,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Brother","title_en":"Brother","content_ro":"<h3>BROTHER<\/h3>\n<p>Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for Benjamin is not always found between brothers. Cain killed his brother Abel (4:8), and Esau hated his brother, Jacob (27:41). A brother may be a bad influence (Dt 13:6-7), but ideally he is one who helps in times of need (Prv 17:17). The law of levirate marriage required that if a man died leaving a childless widow, the man’s brother had to raise up children through her to perpetuate the family name (Dt 25:5).<\/p>\n<p>David spoke affectionately of his “brother” Jonathan, although they were not related (2 Sm 1:26). A fellow Israelite could be called brother. The relationship required certain obligations: money could not be loaned to a brother at interest, and a brother could not be enslaved (Lv 25:35-43).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word is used to describe natural brothers, such as Andrew and Peter (Jn 1:41). Four brothers of Jesus are named (Mk 6:3). (The Roman Catholic view is that they were really Jesus’ cousins, but the Greek language has several words for cousin, and the word “brother” is used here; thus, it refers either to children or foster children of Mary and Joseph.) Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him at first (Jn 7:5), but after the resurrection they were meeting with the Christian community (Acts 1:14). Jesus taught that his disciples had one Father (God) and were therefore brothers (Mt 23:8-9), and he graciously identified himself with the disciples as their brother (28:10).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the history of the church it became customary for Christians to address one another as brother (Acts 9:17; Col 1:1); on two occasions the Christian community is called “the brotherhood” (1 Pt 2:17; 5:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Specific duties and responsibilities accompany Christian brotherhood. A Christian’s love for his brother will be demonstrated in the restraint of sexual passions (1 Thes 4:6), provision of material goods when needed (Jas 2:15-16), and determination not to offend (Rom 14:13). A Christian must not “go to law” against a brother (1 Cor 6:5-6), but brothers must resolve their problems either personally or within the church group (Mt 18:15-17). The relationship between Christians is significant because a Christian cannot offer worship to God if he is out of harmony with his brother (Mt 5:23-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Family Life and Relations; Brothers (and Sisters).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BROTHER<\/h3>\n<p>Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman.<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for Benjamin is not always found between brothers. Cain killed his brother Abel (4:8), and Esau hated his brother, Jacob (27:41). A brother may be a bad influence (Dt 13:6-7), but ideally he is one who helps in times of need (Prv 17:17). The law of levirate marriage required that if a man died leaving a childless widow, the man’s brother had to raise up children through her to perpetuate the family name (Dt 25:5).<\/p>\n<p>David spoke affectionately of his “brother” Jonathan, although they were not related (2 Sm 1:26). A fellow Israelite could be called brother. The relationship required certain obligations: money could not be loaned to a brother at interest, and a brother could not be enslaved (Lv 25:35-43).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the Greek word is used to describe natural brothers, such as Andrew and Peter (Jn 1:41). Four brothers of Jesus are named (Mk 6:3). (The Roman Catholic view is that they were really Jesus’ cousins, but the Greek language has several words for cousin, and the word “brother” is used here; thus, it refers either to children or foster children of Mary and Joseph.) Jesus’ brothers did not believe in him at first (Jn 7:5), but after the resurrection they were meeting with the Christian community (Acts 1:14). Jesus taught that his disciples had one Father (God) and were therefore brothers (Mt 23:8-9), and he graciously identified himself with the disciples as their brother (28:10).<\/p>\n<p>Early in the history of the church it became customary for Christians to address one another as brother (Acts 9:17; Col 1:1); on two occasions the Christian community is called “the brotherhood” (1 Pt 2:17; 5:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Specific duties and responsibilities accompany Christian brotherhood. A Christian’s love for his brother will be demonstrated in the restraint of sexual passions (1 Thes 4:6), provision of material goods when needed (Jas 2:15-16), and determination not to offend (Rom 14:13). A Christian must not “go to law” against a brother (1 Cor 6:5-6), but brothers must resolve their problems either personally or within the church group (Mt 18:15-17). The relationship between Christians is significant because a Christian cannot offer worship to God if he is out of harmony with his brother (Mt 5:23-24).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Family Life and Relations; Brothers (and Sisters).<\/p>","summary_ro":"BROTHER Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman. In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for B...","summary_en":"BROTHER Man or boy in his relationship to the other children of his parents; also a close male friend or fellow member of the same race, creed, profession, organization, and the like; a kinsman. In the OT the Hebrew word translated “brother” describes the relationship between male children who have at least one parent in common. Joseph and Benjamin were children of Jacob and Rachel (Gn 35:24), but the other sons born to Jacob are also called Joseph’s brothers (42:6). The love Joseph had for B...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":9712,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Discipline","title_en":"Discipline","content_ro":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\n<p>Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTeaching\">Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Although used only once in the <span>kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in <span>kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\n<p>OT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Complementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\n<p>Discipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\n<p>It is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Self-Discipline\">Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ParentalDiscipline\">Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\n<p>The parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Human fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChurchDiscipline\">Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\n<p>For the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DISCIPLINE<\/h3>\n<p>Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>• Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalTeaching\">Biblical Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Although used only once in the <span>kjv<\/span> (Jb 36:10), the word “discipline,” in various noun and verb forms, occurs frequently in modern versions of the Bible. The Hebrew and Greek words commonly rendered “discipline” are sometimes translated as “reproof,” “warning,” “restraint,” “correction,” or (especially in <span>kjv<\/span>) “chastisement.” More positive synonyms include “upbringing,” “training,” “instruction,” and “education.”<\/p>\n<p>OT usage of “discipline” is noticeably more negative than in the NT, principally because of the legal aspect of God’s approach to Israel under the old (Mosaic) covenant. The “new covenant” approach to the church leads to a more positive language of discipline in the NT. Yet both covenants had the same goal: righteousness. Considered in that light, even the OT emphasis on punishment proceeds from a positive motive toward a constructive goal. Where the OT emphasized retaliation, it was to teach offenders the nature of their offense by showing them an effect like the one they had caused. Vindication of a wronged person’s rights also vindicated God’s righteousness. Vindication was an important way of upholding God’s justice. Retribution was also important. Covenant breaking brought on the covenant curse (Dt 27:26) in the form of punitive discipline. Retribution reestablished the authority of God’s law and taught respect for his standards of righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>Complementary to punitive discipline, positive discipline can be thought of as reinforcive discipline. God always disciplines; he does so punitively when necessary, but reinforcingly when possible.<\/p>\n<p>Discipline is frequently spoken of as being exercised by God over Israel (Lv 26:23; Dt 4:36; 8:5; Jer 31:18), over the nations (Ps 94:10), or over individuals (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:10, 12; Heb 12:5-11; Rv 3:19). In Israel parental responsibility to discipline children was taken seriously (Dt 21:18). Fathers were solemnly charged to discipline their sons (Prv 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13; 29:17; cf. Eph 6:4; Heb 12:7-10). In the church, disciplining was a pastoral responsibility (2 Tm 2:25).<\/p>\n<p>It is understandable that people fear discipline from God (Ps 6:1), but it is his wrath that should be feared. His wrath is directed only against those who have proved themselves by their actions to be God’s enemies (Dt 11:2-3). God’s discipline is different from his wrath and should not be despised (Prv 3:11) or taken for granted (Heb 12:5). Only a fool or wicked person hates it (Ps 50:17; Prv 5:12; Jer 31:18). God disciplines his people as a loving father disciplines a beloved son (Dt 8:5; Prv 3:11-12; Heb 12:5-7). According to Scripture, a wise person should love discipline (Prv 12:1; 13:24; 2 Tm 1:7; Heb 12:5, 9).<\/p>\n<p>The fruit of discipline is knowledge (Prv 12:1) and parents’ delight (29:17). One who is disciplined can be spoken of as “blessed” (Jb 5:17; Ps 94:12). Where the purpose of discipline is left unspecified, the discipline is nevertheless understood as good and righteous (Dt 4:36; Jb 36:10; Prv 13:24; Rv 3:19). Specifically, discipline is called “the way of life” (Prv 6:23). It saves one from destruction (19:18) and allows one to escape both folly (22:15) and God’s condemnation of the world (1 Cor 11:32). It eventually leads to sharing God’s holiness (Heb 12:7), and yields “the peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v 11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In contrast, the consequences of a lack of discipline are stipulated to be abandonment by God (Lv 26:23-24), death (Prv 5:23), and destruction (19:18).<\/p>\n<p>The book of Proverbs speaks of discipline as necessary to avoid sexual immorality (5:12-23; 6:23-24). Loose or wicked women probably symbolize many kinds of deceptive and enticing situations. To be able to act maturely and responsibly in such situations requires that young people respond to wise and loving parental discipline so that they learn to live disciplined lives. They will then do by “bent of nature” what is right because their nature has been shaped to what it right. Evil can then be shunned, even when it is encountered unexpectedly.<\/p>\n<p>The book of Hebrews also urges its readers to respond to discipline rather than to react against it. In Hebrews two harmful reactions are stipulated and the helpful response is identified. On the one hand, no individual should regard lightly the discipline of the Lord (Heb 12:5). Discipline should be regarded neither as worthless nor as being of little value. On the other hand, one should not lose courage when he is punished by the Lord. That is, preoccupation with the negative aspect of the disciplinary procedure must not obscure its goal or demoralize persons being disciplined. There is a purpose for what happens, which should be sought and realized: “No discipline is enjoyable while it happening—it is painful! But afterward there will be a quiet harvest of right living for those who are trained in this way” (Heb 12:11, <span>nlt<\/span>). The exhortation is not to reject discipline or be dejected by it, but to accept it and be instructed by it.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Self-Discipline\">Self-Discipline<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ ethics of righteousness both fulfill and surpass the stringent code of the old covenant (Mt 5:17-48). Yet Christians are not therefore inherently more legalistic than were the Pharisees. Set free from “the law of sin and death,” Christians have “the law of the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ” (Rom 8:1-8) to provide a built-in dynamic to fulfill the will of God. Beyond slavish obedience to the letter of the law, believers are enabled by the indwelling Spirit of God to exercise self-discipline. Spiritual transformation is accompanied by renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2), which brings fresh understanding of oneself, one’s motivations, and one’s attitudes.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ParentalDiscipline\">Parental Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The family constitutes the basic unit of the human community. Within that cell of intimate relationships, parents are entrusted with the responsibility of guiding and correcting their children (Dt 6:7; Prv 22:6). The biblical view is essentially pessimistic about the perfectibility of human nature. Therefore, parents are urged not to leave children at the mercy of their own natural tendencies. Undisciplined children are potential victims of the powerful conditioning exerted by a predominantly pagan culture. To exercise their responsibilities properly, parents must model values, practices, and attitudes to their children, besides teaching them through instruction and correction.<\/p>\n<p>The parents’ educational task is best accomplished through positive means such as advice, exhortation, counseling, family devotions, and Christian training in church and Sunday school. But it also may require negative measures, such as prohibitions and disciplinary action. When verbal admonitions are not heeded by small children, punishment becomes an effective form of persuasion (Prv 13:24). Physical discipline, however, should be administered on the basis of clearly stated and understood principles. Christian parents must avoid punishing out of anger or personal animosity, and must never cause injury to a child. Physical discipline should be viewed as a last resort intended to obtain maximum educational results with minimum outrage to children (Eph 6:4).<\/p>\n<p>Human fallenness (Gn 3) means that self-centeredness infects even children (cf. Ps 51:5). Somehow children must learn respect for themselves and for others. Left on their own and then battered by a fallen society, they can become rebellious social misfits leaving a trail of heartache in their own lives and in the lives of other people. Love for one’s children does not preclude the use of negative disciplinary measures. As distasteful as they may seem to both parents and children, genuine love may require them. A family environment regulated by consistent and loving firmness will enhance the chances for children to mature as responsible and considerate individuals.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ChurchDiscipline\">Church Discipline<\/p>\n<p>The church is basically a large family of which each believer is a member. The nature of the church—as a community intended to reflect in the faith, worship, and lives of its members the true character of God—distinguishes it from all other groups.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, the church is called to be an open community of concern, reaching out in compassion to desperately needy human beings. Christian lifestyles clearly differ from pagan lifestyles. That difference often creates a barrier isolating the “lost” from the very people who could extend to them God’s deliverance from loneliness, addictions, disorientation, broken relationships, and so on. The church has a responsibility not to place unscriptural obstacles in the way of its outreach to unbelievers, yet the tension between openness and purity is difficult to resolve. Without a careful balance, a church can easily become unduly restrictive or overly permissive. In either extreme its witness is impaired.<\/p>\n<p>The solution to the dilemma lies in formulating church discipline that is authentically biblical. The Scriptures provide the church with ample guidance for the formulation of standards of conduct (e.g., Ex 20:1-17; 1 Cor 5:11; 6:9-11; Eph 4:25-32; 5:1-21; Col 3:5-11). As those standards are spelled out, however, it is necessary to differentiate between biblical absolutes and cultural norms. For instance, though drunkenness is expressly forbidden in the NT, there is no scriptural prohibition on the drinking of wine. Some churches allow drinking but decry drunkenness, others recommend abstinence to their members, and still others make abstinence from alcoholic beverages a condition of membership. The NT, recognizing that conflict sometimes occurs between Christian liberty and Christian responsibility, gives guidelines for resolving such conflicts (1 Cor 8).<\/p>\n<p>For the sake of scriptural consistency and in order to be credible, church discipline should oppose sins of attitude with the same severity as for “gross sins.” The NT condemns immorality, murder, and drunkenness—but along with them envy, jealousy, anger, selfishness, complaining, and criticism. Each of the vices is an impediment to entering the kingdom of God (Gal 5:19-21). Unbelievers are often made to feel unwelcome in the church because of secondary matters such as smoking or drinking. Yet gossiping, complaining, and selfishness among church members are seldom exposed and properly disciplined. A more consistent position would promote the purity of the church and would also enhance its ministry as a supportive, accepting center of Christian love.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to affirming the necessity for discipline within the church, the NT delineates a procedure for carrying out disciplinary action (Mt 18:15-18; 1 Cor 5:3-13; Gal 6:1). Offenders are first to be approached and admonished privately. If they refuse to repent or mend their ways, the case is to be presented before the leadership of the church and then, if necessary, before the whole congregation. Should offenders persist in their error, they are to be ostracized, not out of vindictiveness but with the hope of bringing them to repentance and restoration (2 Thes 3:14-15).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible’s emphasis on the necessity for self-discipline, parental discipline, and church discipline seems underscored by the moral decline evident in many areas of modern society. God’s love, as depicted in the Bible and exemplified in Jesus Christ, is intended to teach all people how to live. Those who spurn God’s “positive reinforcement” encounter the negative aspects of his discipline. Christians who discipline themselves, their children, and each other in a loving way honor Christ and model his way of life, thus helping others to understand God’s purposes.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","summary_en":"DISCIPLINE Learning that molds character and enforces correct behavior—from a Latin word meaning “instruction” or “training.” To discipline a person or a group means to put them in a state of good order so that they function in the way intended. Discipline, in spite of a popular misconception, is not inherently stern or harsh. Bible translators chose “disciple” as an appropriate term for one who learns by following. Preview • Biblical Teaching • Self-Discipline • Parental Discipline • Church ...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":30163,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Letter to Philemon","title_en":"Letter to Philemon","content_ro":"<h3>PHILEMON, L<span>etter to<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The shortest of Paul’s Prison Epistles.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Origin<\/p>\n<p>• Recipient<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>In keeping with his custom and with the contemporary canons of the epistolary genre, the apostle Paul identifies himself as the author of this letter. He says that he was a prisoner at the time of writing (Phlm 1:9-10, 13, 23) because of his witness to Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to ascertain the location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time of writing. Of Caesarea, Ephesus, or Rome, either of the latter locations seems to correspond to the data available in this epistle and in Colossians, with which it is closely related (Col 4:7-14; cf. Phlm 1:23-24). The mention of Mark and Luke as Paul’s companions favor Rome as the point of origin of the letter (Phlm 1:24). However, the relative proximity of Ephesus to Colosse, where Philemon resided (about 100 miles, or 160.9 kilometers, away), and the announcement of Paul’s forthcoming visit to Colosse (v 22) suggest Ephesus as the place of confinement. Although an Ephesian imprisonment is not explicitly mentioned in the book of Acts, the account of Paul’s missionary endeavors in that city make it clear that he met with considerable opposition (Acts 20:19), which Paul describes in terms that could imply a time spent in prison (1 Cor 15:32; 2 Cor 1:8-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Recipient\">Recipient<\/p>\n<p>This document is often improperly viewed as a personal note from Paul to Philemon, his convert and friend, church leader in Colosse, and slave owner. In reality, the epistle is addressed to Philemon, to Apphia (presumably Philemon’s wife), to Archippus, and to the congregation of believers that met in Philemon’s house (Phlm 1:1-2). Greetings are sent by the medium of the epistle on behalf of Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, who represent together an impressive contingent of church leaders (vv 23-24). Paul’s purpose in mentioning them is to make Philemon realize that his response to Paul’s plea will not be a private decision but one for which he will be accountable to the community of believers of which he is a part. In the body of Christ, matters that pertain to relationships of believers among themselves are of concern to the whole community. Such matters may not be treated as private issues, since they necessarily affect the well-being of the entire church (Mt 18:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The epistle makes it clear that a warm bond of brotherly love existed between Paul and Philemon. The apostle calls Philemon his “beloved co-worker” (Phlm 1:1); he commends him in effusive terms for Philemon’s involvement in the missionary enterprise (vv 5-7); he appeals to him on the basis of love (v 9); he evokes their sharing of a common partnership (v 17); he gently reminds Philemon that he owes his salvation to Paul (v 19), and he says he trusts him to do what is requested of him and even more (v 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The object of Paul’s letter pertains to a third party—Onesimus, the runaway slave of Philemon. After having committed some indiscretion not revealed in the letter (v 18), the slave had escaped, and having traveled to the big city, he had sought anonymity among the heterogeneous groups of people that form the underclass of any metropolis. Through providential circumstances that remain shrouded in mystery, the fugitive slave had come under Paul’s influence; he had been converted by him (v 10), had endeared himself to Paul’s heart (v 12), and had become involved with him in the work of the gospel to the extent that Paul would have been glad to keep him in his service as his faithful and dear brother (v 13; Col 4:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul knew that, had he kept Onesimus at his side as a coworker, Philemon would have been compelled to assent to his decision (Phlm 1:13-14). However, Paul decided to use the ambiguous situation that had developed as the occasion to make Philemon think through the implications of his faith on slavery, and to cause him to free Onesimus and elevate him to the status of brother, not only in a spiritual sense (“in the Lord”) but also in regard to his civil status (“in the flesh,” v 16). That Philemon acceded to Paul’s request and granted freedom to Onesimus is attested to by the preservation of this document. Had Philemon rejected Paul’s request, he would likely have destroyed the letter in order to erase from human memory what would have become incriminating evidence of his recalcitrance.<\/p>\n<p>An intriguing postscript has been added to this story by the discovery of the repeated references to an elderly bishop named Onesimus who led the church at Ephesus in the early part of the second century, according to Ignatius’s letter to the Ephesians. The identification of the bishop with Philemon’s slave is suggested by the use in Ignatius’s letter of Paul’s play on words with the name of Onesimus in verses 11 and 20 (Onesimus means “useful” or “beneficial”). Should this be the case, it is conceivable that the former slave was the individual who collected the Pauline letters that were eventually integrated into the NT canon, including the letter to Philemon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Paul’s letter to Philemon was to dramatize the incongruity of the institution of slavery with Christianity and thus obtain the release of Onesimus. There is no evidence in the epistle that Paul was worried about Philemon’s inflicting upon Onesimus the harsh punishments that were prescribed by Roman law for runaway slaves. However, Paul was concerned that Onesimus not be reinstated as a slave but that he be received as a full-fledged member of Philemon’s family, and that he be treated with at least the same deference and dignity that might have been extended to Paul himself (vv 17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Teaching\">Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Among the many teachings contained in this small epistle, three deserve special mention.<\/p>\n<p>First, the letter bears witness to the revolutionary challenge brought by the gospel to the sin-laden institutions of society. As such, it constitutes a condemnation of the practice of slavery. Jesus had denied his followers the right to own or control other human beings. Within the Christian community, mastery or leadership was to be exercised in servanthood from the bottom of the social ladder rather than hierarchically along lines of authority (Mk 10:42-45). As a result, class differences had become irrelevant among Christians. In Christ, there was neither slave nor free but all were one in him (Gal 3:28). Enslaved Christians who could obtain their freedom were to avail themselves of the opportunity (1 Cor 7:21), and those who were free were to avoid becoming slaves of men (1 Cor 7:23; Gal 5:1). Conversely, Christian slave owners were to act as servants to their slaves (Eph 6:9), and all Christians were to be servants to one another (Gal 5:13). Consequently, Philemon was to receive Onesimus “no longer as a slave” (Phlm 1:16).<\/p>\n<p>Second, if adherence to the gospel prohibits a conservative maintenance of the status quo, it also rules out its violent overthrow. The revolutionary temper of the gospel is expressed in a posture of servanthood rather than in militant hostility. Onesimus was advised by Paul to demonstrate this theology of liberation by returning in submission to Philemon so as to allow the Holy Spirit to effect radical change in their relationship. The employment of Satan’s methods to achieve kingdom results rules out divine intervention and results in increased oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the epistle provides a masterful model of inspired churchmanship. The situation that had developed between Philemon and Onesimus required the mediation of an advocate who could command the respect of the former in order to speak successfully on behalf of the latter. To win his case, Paul used the psychology of commendation (vv 4-7); he emphasized his own self-sacrificial suffering for the sake of the gospel (v 9); he played on Philemon’s goodwill (v 14); he appealed to personal bonds of friendship (vv 17, 20); he offered to assume responsibility for losses incurred (v 18); he reminded Philemon of his own indebtedness to Paul (v 19); and he announced a forthcoming encounter that might have caused embarrassment had Philemon demurred at his request (v 22). Paul’s approach is personal and pastoral, friendly but fervent. It exhibits a perfect balance of firmness and finesse. It demonstrates how genuine Christian leadership is to be exercised through persuasion and entreatment rather than by heavy-handed authoritarian impositions.<\/p>\n<p>Although it is one of the shortest documents in the Bible, the Letter to Philemon stands as a timeless monument to the dignity and equality conferred by Christ on all humans regardless of rank, gender, class, or status. It also offers Christians a mandate and a methodology to pursue effective social reform.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Paul, The Apostle; Philemon (Person).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PHILEMON, L<span>etter to<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The shortest of Paul’s Prison Epistles.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Origin<\/p>\n<p>• Recipient<\/p>\n<p>• Background<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose<\/p>\n<p>• Teaching<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>In keeping with his custom and with the contemporary canons of the epistolary genre, the apostle Paul identifies himself as the author of this letter. He says that he was a prisoner at the time of writing (Phlm 1:9-10, 13, 23) because of his witness to Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Origin\">Origin<\/p>\n<p>It is difficult to ascertain the location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time of writing. Of Caesarea, Ephesus, or Rome, either of the latter locations seems to correspond to the data available in this epistle and in Colossians, with which it is closely related (Col 4:7-14; cf. Phlm 1:23-24). The mention of Mark and Luke as Paul’s companions favor Rome as the point of origin of the letter (Phlm 1:24). However, the relative proximity of Ephesus to Colosse, where Philemon resided (about 100 miles, or 160.9 kilometers, away), and the announcement of Paul’s forthcoming visit to Colosse (v 22) suggest Ephesus as the place of confinement. Although an Ephesian imprisonment is not explicitly mentioned in the book of Acts, the account of Paul’s missionary endeavors in that city make it clear that he met with considerable opposition (Acts 20:19), which Paul describes in terms that could imply a time spent in prison (1 Cor 15:32; 2 Cor 1:8-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Recipient\">Recipient<\/p>\n<p>This document is often improperly viewed as a personal note from Paul to Philemon, his convert and friend, church leader in Colosse, and slave owner. In reality, the epistle is addressed to Philemon, to Apphia (presumably Philemon’s wife), to Archippus, and to the congregation of believers that met in Philemon’s house (Phlm 1:1-2). Greetings are sent by the medium of the epistle on behalf of Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, who represent together an impressive contingent of church leaders (vv 23-24). Paul’s purpose in mentioning them is to make Philemon realize that his response to Paul’s plea will not be a private decision but one for which he will be accountable to the community of believers of which he is a part. In the body of Christ, matters that pertain to relationships of believers among themselves are of concern to the whole community. Such matters may not be treated as private issues, since they necessarily affect the well-being of the entire church (Mt 18:15-20).<\/p>\n<p>The epistle makes it clear that a warm bond of brotherly love existed between Paul and Philemon. The apostle calls Philemon his “beloved co-worker” (Phlm 1:1); he commends him in effusive terms for Philemon’s involvement in the missionary enterprise (vv 5-7); he appeals to him on the basis of love (v 9); he evokes their sharing of a common partnership (v 17); he gently reminds Philemon that he owes his salvation to Paul (v 19), and he says he trusts him to do what is requested of him and even more (v 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Background\">Background<\/p>\n<p>The object of Paul’s letter pertains to a third party—Onesimus, the runaway slave of Philemon. After having committed some indiscretion not revealed in the letter (v 18), the slave had escaped, and having traveled to the big city, he had sought anonymity among the heterogeneous groups of people that form the underclass of any metropolis. Through providential circumstances that remain shrouded in mystery, the fugitive slave had come under Paul’s influence; he had been converted by him (v 10), had endeared himself to Paul’s heart (v 12), and had become involved with him in the work of the gospel to the extent that Paul would have been glad to keep him in his service as his faithful and dear brother (v 13; Col 4:9).<\/p>\n<p>Paul knew that, had he kept Onesimus at his side as a coworker, Philemon would have been compelled to assent to his decision (Phlm 1:13-14). However, Paul decided to use the ambiguous situation that had developed as the occasion to make Philemon think through the implications of his faith on slavery, and to cause him to free Onesimus and elevate him to the status of brother, not only in a spiritual sense (“in the Lord”) but also in regard to his civil status (“in the flesh,” v 16). That Philemon acceded to Paul’s request and granted freedom to Onesimus is attested to by the preservation of this document. Had Philemon rejected Paul’s request, he would likely have destroyed the letter in order to erase from human memory what would have become incriminating evidence of his recalcitrance.<\/p>\n<p>An intriguing postscript has been added to this story by the discovery of the repeated references to an elderly bishop named Onesimus who led the church at Ephesus in the early part of the second century, according to Ignatius’s letter to the Ephesians. The identification of the bishop with Philemon’s slave is suggested by the use in Ignatius’s letter of Paul’s play on words with the name of Onesimus in verses 11 and 20 (Onesimus means “useful” or “beneficial”). Should this be the case, it is conceivable that the former slave was the individual who collected the Pauline letters that were eventually integrated into the NT canon, including the letter to Philemon.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Purpose\">Purpose<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of Paul’s letter to Philemon was to dramatize the incongruity of the institution of slavery with Christianity and thus obtain the release of Onesimus. There is no evidence in the epistle that Paul was worried about Philemon’s inflicting upon Onesimus the harsh punishments that were prescribed by Roman law for runaway slaves. However, Paul was concerned that Onesimus not be reinstated as a slave but that he be received as a full-fledged member of Philemon’s family, and that he be treated with at least the same deference and dignity that might have been extended to Paul himself (vv 17, 21).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Teaching\">Teaching<\/p>\n<p>Among the many teachings contained in this small epistle, three deserve special mention.<\/p>\n<p>First, the letter bears witness to the revolutionary challenge brought by the gospel to the sin-laden institutions of society. As such, it constitutes a condemnation of the practice of slavery. Jesus had denied his followers the right to own or control other human beings. Within the Christian community, mastery or leadership was to be exercised in servanthood from the bottom of the social ladder rather than hierarchically along lines of authority (Mk 10:42-45). As a result, class differences had become irrelevant among Christians. In Christ, there was neither slave nor free but all were one in him (Gal 3:28). Enslaved Christians who could obtain their freedom were to avail themselves of the opportunity (1 Cor 7:21), and those who were free were to avoid becoming slaves of men (1 Cor 7:23; Gal 5:1). Conversely, Christian slave owners were to act as servants to their slaves (Eph 6:9), and all Christians were to be servants to one another (Gal 5:13). Consequently, Philemon was to receive Onesimus “no longer as a slave” (Phlm 1:16).<\/p>\n<p>Second, if adherence to the gospel prohibits a conservative maintenance of the status quo, it also rules out its violent overthrow. The revolutionary temper of the gospel is expressed in a posture of servanthood rather than in militant hostility. Onesimus was advised by Paul to demonstrate this theology of liberation by returning in submission to Philemon so as to allow the Holy Spirit to effect radical change in their relationship. The employment of Satan’s methods to achieve kingdom results rules out divine intervention and results in increased oppression.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the epistle provides a masterful model of inspired churchmanship. The situation that had developed between Philemon and Onesimus required the mediation of an advocate who could command the respect of the former in order to speak successfully on behalf of the latter. To win his case, Paul used the psychology of commendation (vv 4-7); he emphasized his own self-sacrificial suffering for the sake of the gospel (v 9); he played on Philemon’s goodwill (v 14); he appealed to personal bonds of friendship (vv 17, 20); he offered to assume responsibility for losses incurred (v 18); he reminded Philemon of his own indebtedness to Paul (v 19); and he announced a forthcoming encounter that might have caused embarrassment had Philemon demurred at his request (v 22). Paul’s approach is personal and pastoral, friendly but fervent. It exhibits a perfect balance of firmness and finesse. It demonstrates how genuine Christian leadership is to be exercised through persuasion and entreatment rather than by heavy-handed authoritarian impositions.<\/p>\n<p>Although it is one of the shortest documents in the Bible, the Letter to Philemon stands as a timeless monument to the dignity and equality conferred by Christ on all humans regardless of rank, gender, class, or status. It also offers Christians a mandate and a methodology to pursue effective social reform.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Paul, The Apostle; Philemon (Person).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PHILEMON, Letter to The shortest of Paul’s Prison Epistles. Preview • Author • Origin • Recipient • Background • Purpose • Teaching Author In keeping with his custom and with the contemporary canons of the epistolary genre, the apostle Paul identifies himself as the author of this letter. He says that he was a prisoner at the time of writing (Phlm 1:9-10, 13, 23) because of his witness to Jesus Christ. Origin It is difficult to ascertain the location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time of writ...","summary_en":"PHILEMON, Letter to The shortest of Paul’s Prison Epistles. Preview • Author • Origin • Recipient • Background • Purpose • Teaching Author In keeping with his custom and with the contemporary canons of the epistolary genre, the apostle Paul identifies himself as the author of this letter. He says that he was a prisoner at the time of writing (Phlm 1:9-10, 13, 23) because of his witness to Jesus Christ. Origin It is difficult to ascertain the location of Paul’s imprisonment at the time of writ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54850,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","summary_en":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54851,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","summary_en":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54852,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","summary_en":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82476,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","summary_en":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82477,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","summary_en":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82478,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","summary_en":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110102,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","summary_en":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110103,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","summary_en":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110104,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","summary_en":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137728,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-35<\/strong> The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","summary_en":"18:15-35 The believing community must not be fractured into rival parties and unreconciled relationships. Its members are to pursue reconciliation (18:15-20) and forgive willingly (18:21-35). At times, however, stern discipline may be necessary (18:17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137729,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15-20<\/strong> Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","summary_en":"18:15-20 Restoration begins privately and should be made public only as a last resort.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137730,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:15","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:15<\/strong> <em>If another believer sins<\/em><em>,<\/em> love requires us to <em>go privately and point out the offense<\/em> (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","summary_en":"18:15 If another believer sins, love requires us to go privately and point out the offense (Lev 19:17; Luke 17:3; Gal 6:1; 1 Tim 5:20; Titus 3:10).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62211,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67182,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89837,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94808,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117463,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122434,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":145089,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Dealing with Conflict","title_en":"Dealing with Conflict","content_ro":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Dealing with Conflict<\/h3>\n<p>God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., Exod 17:1-4). The book of Nehemiah provides perhaps the most comprehensive example of how a godly person can respond to conflict.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah faced both external and internal opposition to all that God was directing him to do. External opposition came from foreigners such as Sanballat, Geshem, and Tobiah. They fiercely opposed the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s walls and mocked Nehemiah’s leadership (Neh 2:10, 2:19; 4:1-3). The opposition gradually grew to include other Arabs, Ammonites, and people from Ashdod, who plotted to attack the builders (4:7-9, 11). To meet this opposition, Nehemiah posted guards, prayed for God’s help, developed an emergency warning system, and kept working (4:6-23). Israel’s frustrated enemies made several attempts to disgrace or kill Nehemiah (6:1-14). However, Nehemiah had the wisdom to avoid or frustrate their plots while focusing on the task God had given him.<\/p>\n<p>Nehemiah also faced internal problems. Wealthy Jews were mistreating the poor by charging high interest (5:1-13). Jews had married foreigners who worshiped other gods (13:23-30). Many were not tithing or keeping the Sabbath holy (10:31-39; 13:10-22). Finally, he had to oppose the priest Eliashib, who had allowed Tobiah to use one of the Temple storerooms (13:4-9). Confronting these problems required a firm commitment to the principles explained in Scripture, boldness in insisting that people follow these divine instructions, and compassion in restoring people to fellowship after the confrontation.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, Nehemiah courageously followed the example of earlier leaders such as Moses, who opposed the worship of the gold calf (Exod 32); Samuel, who opposed those involved with Baal worship (1 Sam 7:3-8); Nathan, who opposed David’s sins (2 Sam 12:1-14); and Jehoshaphat, who trusted in God to defeat a much stronger enemy (2 Chr 20:1-37). Like these earlier men of God, Nehemiah took a stand for what was right instead of letting those for whom he was responsible go their own ways. He refused to be discouraged or intimidated by internal difficulties or external threats against him. He consistently depended on God for wisdom and for blessing on his work.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus and Paul both outlined some strategies for dealing with internal conflict (Matt 5:23-26; 18:15-17; 1 Cor 6:1-8; 10:23-33) and external conflict (Matt 5:43-47; Rom 12:14-21). Unfortunately, the actions of believers, no matter how upstanding, will sometimes be met with continued—or even increased—opposition. Nonetheless, we are called to handle opposition in a way similar to Nehemiah—with wisdom, patience, prayer, and resolve.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 13:5-13; 26:12-35; Exod 32:1-35; 1 Sam 7:3-8; 2 Sam 12:1-31; 19:41-43; 2 Chr 20:1-37; 34:3-7; Neh 2:19-20; 4:1-23; 5:1-13; 6:1-14; 13:4-28; Ps 140:1-2; Prov 13:10; 17:14, 19; 25:8; 26:17, 21; 29:22; Hab 1:3; Acts 23:6-11; 2 Cor 7:5-6; Eph 6:10-18; Phil 2:3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 2:14, 23-26; Titus 2:15; Jas 3:13-18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","summary_en":"Dealing with Conflict God’s people often have to deal with conflict, either from those outside the community who are opposed to God and his purposes or from those inside the community who cause strife and division. Dealing with conflict requires a great deal of wisdom and tact, as even the smallest conflicts can turn disastrous. Paul faced opposition from government (Acts 16:22-24) and community leaders (Acts 19:23-34). Moses dealt with the grumbling and dissatisfied people of Israel (e.g., E...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150060,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation","title_en":"The Message of Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Message of Reconciliation<\/h3>\n<p><em>Reconciliation<\/em> is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s fullest exposition of reconciliation comes in a discussion of the meaning of Jesus’ death in 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. Earlier, Paul had reminded the Corinthians of the centrality of the cross (1 Cor 15:3-5) but had not elaborated much at that point on the meaning of that saving event. Now he explains what Christ’s death on the cross means: Christ identified himself with human sin so that sinners might be restored to their family relationship with God. This reconciliation turns enemies into friends. The cost of this exchange is that “God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ” (2 Cor 5:21).<\/p>\n<p>With the resurrection of Jesus and his triumph over death, a new world is born—a new era in which God’s people have the promise of eternal fellowship with him (see 2 Cor 4:14–5:10). Those who have trusted in Christ for salvation have received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the guarantee of future salvation (5:5). They know that God has accepted them and will welcome them forever.<\/p>\n<p>Those who have been reconciled to God are called to participate in the ministry of reconciliation, helping people find their way back to God (2 Cor 5:18-21). And because believers have experienced this reconciliation, they are to pursue opportunities for reconciliation in their interpersonal relationships as well (see Matt 5:24; 18:15; Rom 12:18).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 45:15; Dan 9:24; Matt 5:24; 18:15; Acts 10:36; Rom 5:1-2; 8:6-9, 15-16; 12:18; 15:13; 2 Cor 5:18-21; 13:11; Eph 2:11-18; Col 1:19-22; Heb 2:17<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","summary_en":"The Message of Reconciliation Reconciliation is a term found throughout the New Testament. In Romans 5:1-11, Paul concentrates on the cost of God’s reconciling work in the death of his son. Colossians 1:15-20 is a hymn in praise of the cosmic scope of reconciliation, focused on the exalted Lord who is ruler of all. In Ephesians 2:11-22, the emphasis is on the reconciliation that embraces both Jews and Gentiles to form a united church with all hostility broken down. Paul’s fullest exposition o...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":21194,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Judge","title_en":"Judge","content_ro":"<h3>JUDGE<\/h3>\n<p>An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was well established.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT era two kinds of courts operated in Palestine, the Jewish and the Roman. Capital cases were tried before a Roman judge. Witnesses were produced at trials (Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tm 5:19). Jesus himself was tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (Mt 27:11-25; Mk 15:2-5; Lk 23:2-3; Jn 18:29-40), and Paul before Felix (Acts 24:1-26) and Festus (25:1-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JUDGE<\/h3>\n<p>An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was well established.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT era two kinds of courts operated in Palestine, the Jewish and the Roman. Capital cases were tried before a Roman judge. Witnesses were produced at trials (Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tm 5:19). Jesus himself was tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman procurator (Mt 27:11-25; Mk 15:2-5; Lk 23:2-3; Jn 18:29-40), and Paul before Felix (Acts 24:1-26) and Festus (25:1-26).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Civil Law and Justice; Criminal Law and Punishment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JUDGE An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was...","summary_en":"JUDGE An official authorized to decide matters brought before a court. The judge undertook a variety of tasks, mostly in legal and judicial areas, but at times in political areas. In the patriarchal period the elders of the tribes decided disputes. Moses appointed other judges to assist him, taking only the difficult cases himself (Ex 18:13-26; Dt 1:9-17). Samuel went on circuit judging cases (1 Sm 7:16-17); his sons became judges too (8:1). During the monarchy period, the office of judge was...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38507,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Witness","title_en":"Witness","content_ro":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WITNESS<\/h3>\n<p>One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheOldTestament\">Witness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1).<\/p>\n<p>The truth of testimony is so important that the Bible expressly forbids false witness in the ninth commandment (Ex 20:16; Dt 5:20; cf. Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20). The practical wisdom of Proverbs speaks out frequently against the false witness (e.g., Prv 6:19; 14:5; 25:18). Nevertheless, false witnesses did arise (Pss 27:12; 35:11), and there are notable examples of the bringing of more than one witness in order to bring about the death of an innocent person. The case of Naboth and his vineyard is notorious; here Jezebel, wife of King Ahab, bribed two men to bear false witness against Naboth so that he would be stoned to death and her wicked husband could take the vineyard he coveted so intensely (1 Kgs 21).<\/p>\n<p>Witnesses could be tested by the judges. If the testimony of an accuser was found to be false, that person was subjected to the punishment he had sought to have executed on the defendant (Dt 19:16-21). Proverbs also speaks of the punishment of the false witness (Prv 19:5, 9; 21:28).<\/p>\n<p>The OT records several accounts of legal proceedings in which witnesses are mentioned. Most of these involve the purchase or transfer of property. Ruth 4:7-12 relates the redemption of a field from Naomi by Boaz. Isaiah found “reliable witnesses” concerning a property title written on a large tablet (Is 8:1-2). To confirm the prophecy of the return of the exiles from Babylon, Jeremiah bought and paid for a field in the presence of witnesses, who also signed the deed for the property (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>At the conclusion of his farewell message at Shechem, Joshua declared that the Israelites themselves were witnesses that they had chosen to serve the Lord; then he set up a large stone and declared that it also was a witness (Jos 24:22-27). The people of Israel themselves were declared God’s witnesses (Is 43:10; 44:8-9). They were witnesses to the existence of God, to his uniqueness, holiness, power, and love. When they failed to acknowledge his uniqueness and holiness and turned to idolatry, he sent them into captivity, as he had warned, for they had failed in their witness and had given opportunity for the enemies of God to blaspheme.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WitnessintheNewTestament\">Witness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the various words for witness are mainly related to the verb <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">martureo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to bear witness, be a witness.” The word “martyr” shows the ultimate form of witness in that Christians have sacrificed their lives because of their witness for Jesus Christ.<\/p>\n<p>John the Baptist was both a witness and a martyr. As the forerunner of the Messiah, his mission was to bear witness to the light and to identify the Lamb of God (Jn 1:7-8, 19-36). The followers of Jesus, and particularly the 12 apostles, were witnesses to the person and character of Jesus. They knew him intimately, heard his teachings and observed his miracles; three were witnesses of his transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; 2 Pt 1:17-18) and many were witnesses to his resurrection (Lk 24:48; 1 Cor 15:4-8). At the time of his ascension, the disciples were specifically commissioned to be his witnesses (Acts 1:8).<\/p>","summary_ro":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","summary_en":"WITNESS One who tells what he or she has seen or personally experienced, often in a court of law. The term may also refer to the testimony the person has given. Witness in the Old Testament In the judicial procedure outlined in the OT, one witness was not adequate for personal testimony against anyone, but two or three witnesses were required (Dt 17:6; 19:15). This principle was incorporated into Jewish law and is reiterated in the NT (cf. Mt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). The truth of testimony is so i...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54853,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","summary_en":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82479,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","summary_en":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110105,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","summary_en":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137731,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:16<\/strong> By requiring the presence of <em>one or two others<\/em><em>,<\/em> Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","summary_en":"18:16 By requiring the presence of one or two others, Jesus prevented slanderous, unsubstantiated accusations from being presented to the congregation (see John 8:17; 2 Cor 13:1; 1 Tim 5:19; Heb 10:28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":6550,"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":8382,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cursed Curse","title_en":"Cursed Curse","content_ro":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CURSE, CURSED<\/h3>\n<p>Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PaganBeliefs\">Pagan Beliefs<\/p>\n<p>Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work calamity on one’s enemies. In some pagan cultures, curses were written on clay jars that were then smashed, symbolically initiating or effecting the intended curse.<\/p>\n<p>Tombs were protected against would-be desecrators by means of curses. Royal inscriptions were protected by maledictions aimed at anyone who might alter, destroy, or defy the written decree (Ezr 6:11-12).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinOldTestamentTimes\">Curses in Old Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Among the Hebrews a curse, valid only within a covenant framework overseen by God, was spoken for the sake of justice. In the OT the curse was an integral part of a covenant relationship—between God and the community, between God and an individual, or among members of the community. To break the terms of a covenant was to merit the covenant curse or curses. A curse invoked under other conditions was powerless. “Like a sparrow in its flitting, like a swallow in its flying, a curse that is causeless does not alight” (Prv 26:2, <span>rsv<\/span>). A curse could be retracted by pronouncing a blessing (Ex 12:32; Jgs 17:1-2; 2 Sm 21:1-3).<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of parents (Ex 21:17; cf. Prv 20:20; Mt 15:4), the ruler (Ex 22:28), and the deaf (Lv 19:14). A man who suspected his wife of unfaithfulness could require that she submit to a test administered by the priest that would result in a curse upon her if she was guilty (Nm 5:11-31). Individuals might pronounce a curse upon themselves to show the truthfulness of their assertions or promises (Nm 5:19-22; Jb 31:7-10, 16-22; Ps 137:5-6). In the NT the apostle Peter followed the OT practice when he used a curse to deny that he knew Jesus (Mk 14:71). Certain men who wished to kill the apostle Paul proved their sincerity by such a solemn curse (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Cursing God was punishable by death (Lv 24:10-16; cf. Ex 22:28; Is 8:21-22).<\/p>\n<p>Curses in Bible history include God’s curse on the serpent, Adam, and Eve (Gn 3:14-19); on Cain (4:11-12); on those who might curse the patriarch Abraham and his descendants (12:3); and on those who put their trust in human strength instead of in the Lord (Jer 17:5). When the people of Israel passed through Moab on their way to the Promised Land, Moab’s king, Balak, hired Balaam to curse the Israelites; he and Balaam learned, however, that they could not curse those whom God had blessed (Nm 22–24). Joshua cursed anyone who might try to rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26; fulfilled in 1 Kgs 16:34). King Saul made a curse that almost cost his son Jonathan’s life (1 Sm 14:24, 43-45). Many other curses are mentioned in the OT (see, e.g., Gn 9:25; 49:5-7; Jos 9:22-23; Jgs 9:7-21, 57; 2 Sm 16:5-13; 1 Kgs 21:17-24; 2 Kgs 2:24; Mal 2:2; 4:6). The pronouncement of “woe” (<span>nlt<\/span> “destruction”) is also the language of curse (Is 5:8-23; cf. Mt 23:13-33, where “alas” and “woe” can be used synonymously and may be either an exclamation of sorrow or of impending doom and calamity).<\/p>\n<p>Psalm 109 contains a lengthy imprecation against the psalmist’s enemies, evidently because they had spoken some words against him falsely (see also Pss 58:6-11; 69:19-28; 143:12). The prophet Jeremiah was not averse to calling on God to punish his tormentors (Jer 11:20; 12:3; 15:15; 17:18; 18:21-22; 20:11-12) or asking God not to forgive them (18:23). Such imprecations against one’s enemies are difficult for Christians today to understand because they contrast sharply with the NT commands to “bless those who curse you” (Lk 6:28; cf. Rom 12:14). Jesus’ injunction to “love your enemies” (Mt 5:44) may be intended to point beyond the cursing practiced in the OT to a fuller understanding of God’s command to love one’s neighbor as oneself.<\/p>\n<h5>Covenant Curses<\/h5>\n<p>Protection of a contract or treaty by invoking a curse on the violator was common in OT times. Sometimes a covenant was sealed by cutting up an animal and having the covenanting individuals walk between the severed pieces; the slain animal symbolized the curse to befall the violator. God agreed to submit to such a curse on himself if he broke the covenant he made with the patriarch Abraham (Gn 15:7-21). Later, God accused the leaders and people of Israel of breaking their covenant with him and warned them of the consequences to follow (Jer 34:18-19). An essential part of the covenant God made with Israel at Mt Sinai was the promise of blessings for keeping the covenant and curses for breaking it (Dt 11:26-28; 27:15-26; 28:15-68; 30:19; cf. Lv 26:3-39). Israel suffered those curses in the time of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel; the covenant breakers, including the king, were threatened with a curse (Jer 11:3; Ez 17:11-21).<\/p>\n<h5>The Ban on “Devoted Things”<\/h5>\n<p>A special kind of curse was the ban or anathema. Strictly speaking, it was a vow to devote persons, animals, or objects under such a curse to God. In some cases the priests could use objects that had fallen under the ban (Nm 18:14; Ez 44:29), but that provision did not apply to living beings. All persons or animals under the ban were sacrificed or destroyed (Lv 27:28-29). The ban was commonly used in Israel’s wars against its pagan neighbors. Sometimes everything was declared anathema (Jos 6:17-19), but normally only persons and heathen images were destroyed (Dt 2:34; 3:6; 7:2, 25-26—not even the melted gold of images was to be kept). To violate the ban by preserving any part of the cursed things was to come under the ban oneself. Because Achan did not respect the ban placed upon Jericho, the terms of that curse came upon all Israel until Achan confessed and was executed (Jos 7).<\/p>\n<p>After the exile, the Jews did not practice the anathema (or ban) by putting people to death; people who violated a curse were excommunicated and put out of the congregation of Israel (Ezr 10:8). That meant that the person was no longer part of God’s people and was considered “dead.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CursesinNewTestamentTimes\">Curses in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>Jewish synagogues practiced excommunication, or anathema, in the NT period (Lk 6:22; Jn 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). Later, Christians excommunicated persons by declaring them outside of the redeemed community (Mt 18:17) or “delivered to Satan” (1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tm 1:20). Both practices stemmed from the OT ban. Unlike that curse, however, the excommunication could be removed as soon as the person repented.<\/p>\n<p>Since the anathema branded a person as “rejected” or “cursed by God,” Saul of Tarsus, before his conversion, tried to compel Christians to renounce Christ by calling him accursed (cf. Acts 26:11). Later, as an apostle, Paul (Saul) warned that no one speaking by the Spirit of God could call Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3). Paul pronounced anathema (destined for judgment and perdition) upon anyone who preached another gospel than the one he and the other apostles preached (Gal 1:8-9). Paul said he wished he could be accursed, cut off from salvation and the people of God, if that could lead to the salvation of his fellow Israelites (Rom 9:3). His desire reflected the love of Christ, who accepted the “curse of the law” upon himself in submitting to suffering and death on the cross in order to redeem human beings from that curse (Gal 3:8-14; cf. Dt 21:22-23). The NT promises that a time will come when “there shall no longer be any curse” (Rv 22:3, <span>nasb<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> War, Holy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","summary_en":"CURSE, CURSED Invocation of evil or injury against one’s enemies. As practiced in Bible times, cursing was the opposite of blessing and should not be confused with profanity in the modern sense. Pagan Beliefs Curses and blessings were linked to the ancient pagan belief that spirits of “the gods” could be invoked to act on behalf of a person who repeated certain incantations or performed certain deeds (such as sacrifices). It was thought that a spoken curse possessed an occult power to work ca...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19509,"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":19699,"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":54854,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","summary_en":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82480,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","summary_en":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110106,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","summary_en":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137732,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:17","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:17<\/strong> <em>The church<\/em> is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a <em>pagan or a corrupt tax collector<\/em>, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a public display of power, but restoration of the wayward to holiness and fellowship (Matt 18:10-15; Gal 6:1; Jas 5:19-20).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","summary_en":"18:17 The church is the local Christian community. • The unrepentant person is to be considered a pagan or a corrupt tax collector, a wicked transgressor of the law. Church discipline by exclusion (excommunication; see Acts 5:1-6; Rom 16:17; 1 Cor 5:1-13; 2 Cor 6:14-18; Gal 5:7-12; 2 Thes 3:14-15) is rooted in the conviction that God’s people are to be holy and that sin corrupts fellowship, both between people and between the people and God. The goal is neither vindictive retribution nor a pu...","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":4946,"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":9318,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Demon-Possession","title_en":"Demon-Possession","content_ro":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEMON-POSSESSION<\/h3>\n<p>Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">daimonizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.”<\/p>\n<p>Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.<\/p>\n<p>Demons can also enter the bodies of animals, as in the case of the swine in Mark 5:13. Demons are associated with books of magic (Acts 19:19), idols (1 Cor 10:19-21), and fetishes. Demons often cause illness or physical disability; Luke 13:11 tells of a woman who had “been crippled by an evil spirit” for 18 years but was delivered and healed by Jesus. Since evil spirits often attack the mind and the emotions, many symptoms of mental illness may be attributed to their activity. The boy whom Jesus delivered just after the Transfiguration exhibited symptoms of epilepsy. Paranoia may be the work of a spirit of fear. Some individuals suffering from schizophrenia (split or multiple personality) may in reality be demonized by a number of spirits. It is possible for a person to have many demons. Jesus cast seven of them out of Mary Magdalene (Lk 8:2). The spirit in the Gerasene demoniac gave his name as Legion, “for we are many” (Mk 5:9; Lk 8:30). In the time of Augustus a Roman legion consisted of 6,000 foot soldiers, usually accompanied by an equal number of auxiliary troops.<\/p>\n<p>Demonization occurs in various ways. Some people are demonized by a hereditary curse, which may continue to the third or fourth generation (Ex 20:5). The curse against illegitimacy was particularly strong, for the bastard could not enter the congregation of Israel until the tenth generation (Dt 23:2). Curses may also be placed upon someone by spells, incantations, or similar practices such as voodoo or other forms of witchcraft. Galatians 3:13 speaks of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s having “become a curse” for us. Usually believers are immune from curses made against them, unless they have given grounds to the devil (Eph 4:27). Such grounds may be provided through drugs, illicit sex, the occult, or any other avenue forbidden in the Bible. Involvement with tarot cards, horoscopes, or any other form of fortune-telling may give demons opportunity to enter. Such contacts may seem innocuous, but Satan utilizes the smallest foothold to gain advantage over people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Manifestation\">Manifestation<\/p>\n<p>Often demons prefer to hide rather than to make their presence known, for then they can exercise control without hindrance. When they do manifest themselves, often when challenged, all sorts of strange and frightening things may occur. They possess supernatural powers (cf. Rv 16:14), which they exhibit outright or through their victims. The Gerasene demoniac had superhuman physical strength, so that he could not be bound with fetters or chains (Mk 5:4-5); he lived in tombs and went about night and day screaming and injuring himself with stones.<\/p>\n<p>The spirit in the demonized boy in Mark 9 rendered him dumb and deaf, threw him on the ground, and caused him to roll about and to foam at the mouth (9:18-20). The demon caused him to grind his teeth and become rigid; he had tried to kill the boy by throwing him into the fire and into the water on various occasions (vv 18-22). Before leaving at the command of Jesus, the demon cried out (cf. Mk 1:26), convulsed the boy terribly, and left him lying like a corpse. Jesus took him by the hand and raised him up (9:27). Similar manifestations take place today.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Exorcism\">Exorcism<\/p>\n<p>Casting out demons, or exorcism, was a regular and frequent part of the ministry of Jesus, and he taught and commanded his followers to do the same. This command has never been abrogated, and the ministry of deliverance should be even more important today, when the forces of evil are so rampant. The following principles are derived from the practice of Jesus, the Scriptures, and personal observation and involvement.<\/p>\n<p>1. Jesus spoke to demons and commanded them to come out (Mk 1:25; 9:25). He cast them out “with a word” (Mt 8:16). Jesus gave his followers authority to use his name in casting them out and used this as a sign of the believer (Mk 16:17). His name is not a magical formula, and its use depends on the relationship between the Lord and the person using his name, as the sons of Sceva found out to their dismay (Acts 19:11-18).<\/p>\n<li>2. Jesus cast out demons by the Spirit of God (Mt 12:28). God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power to heal all who were oppressed by the devil (Lk 4:18-19; Acts 10:38).<\/li>\n<li>3. The Lord gave clear teaching about “the binding of the strong man” in deliverance (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27) and about binding and loosing (Mt 18:18).<\/li>\n<li>4. Prayer is an important weapon in spiritual warfare. When the disciples asked (Mk 9:28) why they could not cast out a demon, Jesus replied that this kind comes out only with prayer.<\/li>\n<li>5. Revelation 12:11 testifies to the power of “the blood of the Lamb” in overcoming Satan. Demons do not like to hear of the blood of Jesus and often become agitated at the mention of it.<\/li>\n<li>6. God has equipped the believer with armor for defense in spiritual battle (Eph 6:10-17).<\/li>\n<li>7. The Lord answered Satan with correctly applied texts from the Bible. We have been given the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Eph 6:17; Heb 4:12), as a means of defense and for attack against the enemy.<\/li>\n<li>8. We must come against the hosts of hell from our position in the heavenly places (Eph 2:6), not from our limited earthly station.<\/li>\n<li>9. We must recognize that the ultimate victory has already been won by Jesus, who came to destroy the works of the devil (1 Jn 3:8) and to destroy him who has the power of death (Heb 2:14-16). When Jesus cried out on the cross, “It is finished,” he meant that the redemptive work was done; when he arose from the dead, he demonstrated his power over death. We win only as we enter into his victory.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Demon.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","summary_en":"DEMON-POSSESSION Demonic occupation of a human being. The term “possession” is misleading and is not the best translation for the Greek word daimonizomai, which literally means to be “demonized” and can often best be translated as “to have a demon.” The noun form is “demoniac.” Demons can enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly diffe...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":19698,"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":21667,"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":30051,"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":54855,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","summary_en":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54856,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","summary_en":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82481,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","summary_en":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82482,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","summary_en":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110107,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","summary_en":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110108,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","summary_en":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137733,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18-20<\/strong> These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","summary_en":"18:18-20 These sayings provide the basis for a process of discipline and restoration in the community of disciples.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137734,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:18","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:18","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:18<\/strong> <em>forbid . . . permit:<\/em> The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","summary_en":"18:18 forbid . . . permit: The privilege and authority granted to Peter (16:19) are here granted to the church (or possibly to the twelve apostles, 18:1). The decisions of the community, when in accord with God’s will, are eternally binding.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":19700,"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":54857,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","summary_en":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82483,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","summary_en":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110109,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","summary_en":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137735,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:19","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:19<\/strong> <em>anything you ask:<\/em> In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","summary_en":"18:19 anything you ask: In the context of church discipline (18:15-17), this suggests that discipline must be done in prayer.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":2874,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ascension of Christ","title_en":"Ascension of Christ","content_ro":"<h3>ASCENSION OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Transference of the resurrected body of Jesus from this world to heaven. Among the NT writers, only Luke described Jesus’ ascension. Acts 1:9-11 pictures a scene in which Jesus was “taken up” and disappeared into a cloud. Luke 24:50-51 and Acts 1:12 locate that final event near Bethany, east of Jerusalem on the Mt of Olives.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew concluded his history before Pentecost, but John suggested the Ascension in Jesus’ own comments: Jesus has departed, but he will return (Jn 21:22); he cannot be touched, for he must ascend (20:17); many will believe without having seen him (20:29). Thus, the Gospels assume that (1) after the resurrection Jesus appeared to his disciples; (2) at some point in time those appearances ceased; and (3) although physically absent, Jesus is still spiritually present in his church. Other NT writings agree. The apostle Paul wrote that God raised Christ from the dead “and seated him in the place of honor at God’s right hand in the heavenly realms” (Eph 1:20) or, as the writer of Hebrews put it, “in the place of honor at the right hand of the majestic God of heaven” (Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Ascension, however, is more than merely a past event. It has further significance in the NT that can be summarized under two headings: (1) its meaning for Christ and (2) its meaning for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p>For Christ, the Ascension is the necessary entrance into his heavenly “glorification” in which he sits on the right hand of the Father until his enemies become his footstool (Ps 110:1—the OT text most quoted in the NT). The Ascension is proof of his glorification and his superiority over such OT heroes as David (Acts 2:33-36). By his ascension he rises over all and fills all (Eph 4:10), receiving “the name that is over every name” (Phil 2:9-11). For the author of the book of Hebrews the Ascension is also proof of Christ’s superiority to angels; he sits enthroned while they are constantly being sent out to serve (Heb 1:13-14). Angels, authorities, and powers are all subject to the ascended Christ (1 Tm 3:16; 1 Pt 3:22).<\/p>\n<p>For the Christian, the ascension of Christ is meaningful in four ways. First, without it there would be no gift of the Holy Spirit, who could not come until Jesus had ascended and sent him (Jn 16:7). Without the Ascension, the church would have Jesus locally in one place, not spiritually present “wherever two or three are gathered” (Mt 18:20; cf. 28:20).<\/p>\n<p>Second, since a truly human Jesus has ascended to heaven, human beings can also ascend there. Jesus went “to prepare a place” for his followers (Jn 14:2). The hope of those who are “in Christ” is that they will eventually ascend to be with him (2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the Ascension proves that the sacrifice of Christ is finished and accepted by God. Jesus has passed through the heavens (Heb 4:14) and entered the presence of God (Heb 6:20), which is described as the inner sanctuary of the heavenly temple, the real temple of which the one on earth was a copy (Heb 9:24). Having brought a single, once-for-all sacrifice to God (Heb 9:12), Christ sat down (Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:2), showing that no repetition of his sacrifice is necessary.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, the Ascension means that there is a human being in heaven who sympathizes with humanity and can therefore intercede on humanity’s behalf (1 Jn 2:1). Jesus has experienced everything humans experience—birth, growth, temptation, suffering, and death—and therefore he can serve effectively as an intermediary before God in heaven (Heb 2:17; 5:7-10). Christ’s ascension assures the church that God understands the human situation and that Christians can therefore approach him boldly in their prayers (Heb 4:14-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus Christ’s ascension is an indispensable aspect of NT teaching. It is the basis for recognition of Christ’s exalted status and for the Christian’s confidence and hope.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ASCENSION OF CHRIST<\/h3>\n<p>Transference of the resurrected body of Jesus from this world to heaven. Among the NT writers, only Luke described Jesus’ ascension. Acts 1:9-11 pictures a scene in which Jesus was “taken up” and disappeared into a cloud. Luke 24:50-51 and Acts 1:12 locate that final event near Bethany, east of Jerusalem on the Mt of Olives.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew concluded his history before Pentecost, but John suggested the Ascension in Jesus’ own comments: Jesus has departed, but he will return (Jn 21:22); he cannot be touched, for he must ascend (20:17); many will believe without having seen him (20:29). Thus, the Gospels assume that (1) after the resurrection Jesus appeared to his disciples; (2) at some point in time those appearances ceased; and (3) although physically absent, Jesus is still spiritually present in his church. Other NT writings agree. The apostle Paul wrote that God raised Christ from the dead “and seated him in the place of honor at God’s right hand in the heavenly realms” (Eph 1:20) or, as the writer of Hebrews put it, “in the place of honor at the right hand of the majestic God of heaven” (Heb 1:3).<\/p>\n<p>The Ascension, however, is more than merely a past event. It has further significance in the NT that can be summarized under two headings: (1) its meaning for Christ and (2) its meaning for the Christian.<\/p>\n<p>For Christ, the Ascension is the necessary entrance into his heavenly “glorification” in which he sits on the right hand of the Father until his enemies become his footstool (Ps 110:1—the OT text most quoted in the NT). The Ascension is proof of his glorification and his superiority over such OT heroes as David (Acts 2:33-36). By his ascension he rises over all and fills all (Eph 4:10), receiving “the name that is over every name” (Phil 2:9-11). For the author of the book of Hebrews the Ascension is also proof of Christ’s superiority to angels; he sits enthroned while they are constantly being sent out to serve (Heb 1:13-14). Angels, authorities, and powers are all subject to the ascended Christ (1 Tm 3:16; 1 Pt 3:22).<\/p>\n<p>For the Christian, the ascension of Christ is meaningful in four ways. First, without it there would be no gift of the Holy Spirit, who could not come until Jesus had ascended and sent him (Jn 16:7). Without the Ascension, the church would have Jesus locally in one place, not spiritually present “wherever two or three are gathered” (Mt 18:20; cf. 28:20).<\/p>\n<p>Second, since a truly human Jesus has ascended to heaven, human beings can also ascend there. Jesus went “to prepare a place” for his followers (Jn 14:2). The hope of those who are “in Christ” is that they will eventually ascend to be with him (2 Cor 5:1-10).<\/p>\n<p>Third, the Ascension proves that the sacrifice of Christ is finished and accepted by God. Jesus has passed through the heavens (Heb 4:14) and entered the presence of God (Heb 6:20), which is described as the inner sanctuary of the heavenly temple, the real temple of which the one on earth was a copy (Heb 9:24). Having brought a single, once-for-all sacrifice to God (Heb 9:12), Christ sat down (Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:2), showing that no repetition of his sacrifice is necessary.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, the Ascension means that there is a human being in heaven who sympathizes with humanity and can therefore intercede on humanity’s behalf (1 Jn 2:1). Jesus has experienced everything humans experience—birth, growth, temptation, suffering, and death—and therefore he can serve effectively as an intermediary before God in heaven (Heb 2:17; 5:7-10). Christ’s ascension assures the church that God understands the human situation and that Christians can therefore approach him boldly in their prayers (Heb 4:14-16).<\/p>\n<p>Thus Christ’s ascension is an indispensable aspect of NT teaching. It is the basis for recognition of Christ’s exalted status and for the Christian’s confidence and hope.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ASCENSION OF CHRIST Transference of the resurrected body of Jesus from this world to heaven. Among the NT writers, only Luke described Jesus’ ascension. Acts 1:9-11 pictures a scene in which Jesus was “taken up” and disappeared into a cloud. Luke 24:50-51 and Acts 1:12 locate that final event near Bethany, east of Jerusalem on the Mt of Olives. Matthew concluded his history before Pentecost, but John suggested the Ascension in Jesus’ own comments: Jesus has departed, but he will return (Jn 21...","summary_en":"ASCENSION OF CHRIST Transference of the resurrected body of Jesus from this world to heaven. Among the NT writers, only Luke described Jesus’ ascension. Acts 1:9-11 pictures a scene in which Jesus was “taken up” and disappeared into a cloud. Luke 24:50-51 and Acts 1:12 locate that final event near Bethany, east of Jerusalem on the Mt of Olives. Matthew concluded his history before Pentecost, but John suggested the Ascension in Jesus’ own comments: Jesus has departed, but he will return (Jn 21...","source":"Articles\/A.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17245,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Immanuel","title_en":"Immanuel","content_ro":"<h3>IMMANUEL<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of the birth of the incarnate God, Jesus the Messiah, as shown in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyinIsaiahsDay\">The Prophecy in Isaiah’s Day<\/p>\n<p>In focusing on the birth of Jesus as Immanuel, there has been some neglect of the historical fulfillment that occurred in the time of Ahaz. Ahaz was the son of a good king, Jotham and the grandson of another godly ruler, Uzziah, but his reign was marked by apostasy and idolatry. He made “molten images” for the Baals, offered incense in the Hinnom Valley, and even burned his sons as an offering (2 Chr 28:2-4). Because of this, the Lord gave him into the hand of Rezin, king of Syria, and of Pekah, king of Israel. The Edomites also invaded Judah, and the Philistines attacked the Shephelah and the Negev and took several cities (vv 17-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) for help against Israel and Syria. Tiglath-pileser accepted tribute from Ahaz, but attacked him instead of helping him (2 Chr 28:20-21). When he went to Damascus to meet the Assyrian king, Ahaz saw an altar, upon which he made offerings to the gods of Syria (v 23). He had a replica of this made and placed in the temple of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 16:10-12). The prophet Isaiah was directed to accost Ahaz at the end of the conduit of the upper pool. God’s message to the king was to “take heart,” for the attacking kings would fall (Is 7:7-9). Isaiah directed Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign of this, but the king demurred, having a sudden attack of piety (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>Upon this refusal, the Lord gave to Ahaz a sign: a young woman would conceive and bear a son and call his name Immanuel (Is 7:14). That son would be able to distinguish good from evil by the time he was old enough to eat curds and wild honey, but even before that, the two kings would be removed and the king of Assyria would devastate their lands. The people would be taken away captive, so that the land would lie desolate and uncultivated. A man would have a cow to provide milk for curds, and wild honey would be gathered from the tangle of brush in the untended land.<\/p>\n<p>The identity of this woman and child in Isaiah’s time is uncertain. It has been proposed that the woman was Abijah, the wife of Ahaz, and that their son, Hezekiah, was this Immanuel. This is not demonstrable, and it seems inappropriate that a man like Ahaz should be the father of Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>It has also been suggested that the wife of Isaiah was the mother of Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 tells of the prospective birth of Immanuel; 8:3 tells of the conception and birth of Isaiah’s son, whose name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz (“swift to plunder and quick to spoil”) is related to the prediction of the fall of Judah’s enemies, for before the child would learn to talk, the lands of Syria and Israel would be taken by the king of Assyria (Is 8:4). Isaiah’s statement that he and his children were “signs and portents in Israel from the <span>Lord<\/span>” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>) enhances the view that it was his son who was also named Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then directed a message to Immanuel (Is 8:5-10). Because the people had refused the gracious invitation of the Lord, the Assyrians would scourge and fill the land of Immanuel. The plotting and plans of the people would come to nothing, for “God is with us” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘immanu’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> This is a play on words, using the name Immanuel to express the truth of the Lord’s presence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyFulfilledinJesus\">The Prophecy Fulfilled in Jesus<\/p>\n<p>In the fullness of time God sent forth his son; more than 700 years after Ahaz, Jesus was born and here all ambiguities fade away. His mother was a virgin from Nazareth named Mary (Miriam), betrothed to a solid citizen named Joseph. Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 as being fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. The Scripture is very explicit in stating that Mary had no sexual contact with her husband prior to the birth of Jesus (Mt 1:25). The same precision is seen in the Gospel of Luke. When the announcement of this child’s conception was made to Mary, she asked, “How can this be, since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The angelic messenger explained that this conception would be brought about by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon her and by the overshadowing power of the Most High (v 35). For this reason the child would be not only Jesus and Immanuel but he would be called holy, the Son of God, God manifest in the flesh (Jn 1:18); the child would be unique, being both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>There were great distinctions between the Immanuel of Isaiah’s day and Immanuel the son of Mary. The first was a type; the other, the antitype. The first was the shadow; the other, the reality. The one symbolized deliverance from foreign oppression; the second was the Deliverer from the oppressor. The first represented God’s presence for but a few years; the second Immanuel is the son who lives forever.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of “God with us” was often reiterated by Jesus. He told his disciples that where two or three gathered in his name he would be present (Mt 18:20). Before his ascension, he assured them that he would be with them until the end of the age (28:20).<\/p>\n<p>He spoke also of the promise of the Holy Spirit, who “lives with you now and later will be in you” (Jn 14:17, <span>nlt<\/span>), who will abide with them forever (v 16). The “God with us” indwelling is spoken of in Colossians 1:27: “Christ lives in you.” In the consummation of all things, as shown to the apostle John, the Lord said: “Look, the home of God is now among his people! He will live with them, and they will be his people. God himself will be with them” (Rv 21:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of; Messiah.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>IMMANUEL<\/h3>\n<p>Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of the birth of the incarnate God, Jesus the Messiah, as shown in Matthew.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyinIsaiahsDay\">The Prophecy in Isaiah’s Day<\/p>\n<p>In focusing on the birth of Jesus as Immanuel, there has been some neglect of the historical fulfillment that occurred in the time of Ahaz. Ahaz was the son of a good king, Jotham and the grandson of another godly ruler, Uzziah, but his reign was marked by apostasy and idolatry. He made “molten images” for the Baals, offered incense in the Hinnom Valley, and even burned his sons as an offering (2 Chr 28:2-4). Because of this, the Lord gave him into the hand of Rezin, king of Syria, and of Pekah, king of Israel. The Edomites also invaded Judah, and the Philistines attacked the Shephelah and the Negev and took several cities (vv 17-18).<\/p>\n<p>Ahaz appealed to Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria (745–727 <span>BC<\/span>) for help against Israel and Syria. Tiglath-pileser accepted tribute from Ahaz, but attacked him instead of helping him (2 Chr 28:20-21). When he went to Damascus to meet the Assyrian king, Ahaz saw an altar, upon which he made offerings to the gods of Syria (v 23). He had a replica of this made and placed in the temple of Jerusalem (2 Kgs 16:10-12). The prophet Isaiah was directed to accost Ahaz at the end of the conduit of the upper pool. God’s message to the king was to “take heart,” for the attacking kings would fall (Is 7:7-9). Isaiah directed Ahaz to ask the Lord for a sign of this, but the king demurred, having a sudden attack of piety (v 12).<\/p>\n<p>Upon this refusal, the Lord gave to Ahaz a sign: a young woman would conceive and bear a son and call his name Immanuel (Is 7:14). That son would be able to distinguish good from evil by the time he was old enough to eat curds and wild honey, but even before that, the two kings would be removed and the king of Assyria would devastate their lands. The people would be taken away captive, so that the land would lie desolate and uncultivated. A man would have a cow to provide milk for curds, and wild honey would be gathered from the tangle of brush in the untended land.<\/p>\n<p>The identity of this woman and child in Isaiah’s time is uncertain. It has been proposed that the woman was Abijah, the wife of Ahaz, and that their son, Hezekiah, was this Immanuel. This is not demonstrable, and it seems inappropriate that a man like Ahaz should be the father of Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>It has also been suggested that the wife of Isaiah was the mother of Immanuel. Isaiah 7:14 tells of the prospective birth of Immanuel; 8:3 tells of the conception and birth of Isaiah’s son, whose name, Maher-shalal-hash-baz (“swift to plunder and quick to spoil”) is related to the prediction of the fall of Judah’s enemies, for before the child would learn to talk, the lands of Syria and Israel would be taken by the king of Assyria (Is 8:4). Isaiah’s statement that he and his children were “signs and portents in Israel from the <span>Lord<\/span>” (v 18, <span>rsv<\/span>) enhances the view that it was his son who was also named Immanuel.<\/p>\n<p>The Lord then directed a message to Immanuel (Is 8:5-10). Because the people had refused the gracious invitation of the Lord, the Assyrians would scourge and fill the land of Immanuel. The plotting and plans of the people would come to nothing, for “God is with us” <em>(<\/em><span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">‘immanu’el<\/span><em>).<\/em> This is a play on words, using the name Immanuel to express the truth of the Lord’s presence.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheProphecyFulfilledinJesus\">The Prophecy Fulfilled in Jesus<\/p>\n<p>In the fullness of time God sent forth his son; more than 700 years after Ahaz, Jesus was born and here all ambiguities fade away. His mother was a virgin from Nazareth named Mary (Miriam), betrothed to a solid citizen named Joseph. Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 as being fulfilled in the birth of Jesus. The Scripture is very explicit in stating that Mary had no sexual contact with her husband prior to the birth of Jesus (Mt 1:25). The same precision is seen in the Gospel of Luke. When the announcement of this child’s conception was made to Mary, she asked, “How can this be, since I have no husband?” (Lk 1:34, <span>rsv<\/span>). The angelic messenger explained that this conception would be brought about by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon her and by the overshadowing power of the Most High (v 35). For this reason the child would be not only Jesus and Immanuel but he would be called holy, the Son of God, God manifest in the flesh (Jn 1:18); the child would be unique, being both God and man.<\/p>\n<p>There were great distinctions between the Immanuel of Isaiah’s day and Immanuel the son of Mary. The first was a type; the other, the antitype. The first was the shadow; the other, the reality. The one symbolized deliverance from foreign oppression; the second was the Deliverer from the oppressor. The first represented God’s presence for but a few years; the second Immanuel is the son who lives forever.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of “God with us” was often reiterated by Jesus. He told his disciples that where two or three gathered in his name he would be present (Mt 18:20). Before his ascension, he assured them that he would be with them until the end of the age (28:20).<\/p>\n<p>He spoke also of the promise of the Holy Spirit, who “lives with you now and later will be in you” (Jn 14:17, <span>nlt<\/span>), who will abide with them forever (v 16). The “God with us” indwelling is spoken of in Colossians 1:27: “Christ lives in you.” In the consummation of all things, as shown to the apostle John, the Lord said: “Look, the home of God is now among his people! He will live with them, and they will be his people. God himself will be with them” (Rv 21:3, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Names of; Messiah.<\/p>","summary_ro":"IMMANUEL Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of t...","summary_en":"IMMANUEL Hebrew masculine name that means “God with us.” It appears only twice in the OT (Is 7:14; 8:8) and once in the NT (Mt 1:23), where it is sometimes transliterated “Emmanuel.” In the OT the name was given to a child born in the time of Ahaz as a sign to the king that Judah would receive relief from attacks by Israel and Syria. The name symbolized the fact that God would demonstrate his presence with his people in this deliverance. The greater application is that this is a prophecy of t...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":17341,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Incarnation*","title_en":"Incarnation*","content_ro":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>INCARNATION*<\/h3>\n<p>Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentTestimony\">New Testament Testimony<\/p>\n<h5>The Synoptic Gospels<\/h5>\n<p>The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more than his deity. As a result, some believe that it represents an earlier stage in the development of the church’s theology, before the doctrine of incarnation had evolved. That is doubtful for two reasons: Incarnation passages like the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11) probably antedate Mark’s Gospel, and Mark has a well-developed theology of the two natures of Christ. Although he stresses Jesus’ humanity, Mark accents it with an emphasis on divinity. Jesus was called the “beloved Son” by a heavenly voice at his baptism and transfiguration (Mk 1:11; 9:7); demons called him divine (3:11; 5:7), as did a Roman centurion (15:39). Jesus’ “Abba” prayers (14:36; cf. Mt 26:39; Lk 22:42) indicate his sense of divine identity, and at his trial he was charged with claiming the title “Son of the Blessed” (14:61-62). Thus, though the Incarnation is nowhere explicitly stated in Mark, it is implicitly affirmed.<\/p>\n<p>Matthew and Luke express the Incarnation. The birth narratives, of course, stress the event itself, with Matthew emphasizing Jesus’ royal messiahship, and Luke, the divine witness of the Holy Spirit. Matthew’s Gospel is Christ-centered; Luke concentrates on Christ as Savior, or more precisely, on salvation-history. Although Matthew presents Jesus’ humanity, he emphasizes his lordship (Mt 23:6-10) and divine sonship. The Incarnation thus becomes the means whereby the divine becomes human in a universal sense (1:23; 18:20; 24:14; 28:18-20). Luke shows the greatest interest of the three in Jesus’ earthly life. Nevertheless, his Gospel does not stress the human side of Jesus as much as Mark’s. Luke portrays Jesus primarily as the divine Savior within history (Lk 2:11; 4:16-30). He combines Jesus’ messianic office and divine nature, showing that the incarnate Son of God suffered and was exalted in order to bring people to God.<\/p>\n<h5>John’s Writings<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle John’s doctrine of incarnation is more explicit than any of the others, teaching not only Jesus’ God-man status but also his preexistent “glory” (Jn 1:1-18). Central in this presentation is the oneness between Jesus and God the Father (10:29-30; 14:8-11; 1 Jn 2:23). The “I am” (the expressed Christ, taken from the OT title for the one true God and probably signifying God’s personal name, Yahweh) came to reveal God to his people (Jn 1:4-5, 14, 18). Yet John also has the most balanced presentation of the Incarnation. The divine Logos or Word (1:1-18) is the exemplar of perfect humanity; he “became flesh” (v 14) to enlighten people (vv 5, 9) and generate in them “eternal life” (3:14-18; 1 Jn 1:1-3; 4:9).<\/p>\n<h5>Paul’s Epistles<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul presented the Incarnation as Jesus’ path to suffering and redemption. In Galatians 4:4-5 the Incarnation (“born of woman”) came “in the fullness of time” or at the apex of salvation-history, to “redeem those who were under the law.” In the Philippians hymn (Phil 2:6-11, quotes from <span>nasb<\/span>), the Incarnation is seen in terms of preexistence (“though he was in the form of God”), humiliation (“emptied . . . humbled”), and obedience (“becoming obedient to the point of death”). The goal of the Incarnation was the cross (“even death on a cross”), and its result was Christ’s exaltation. The hymn is perhaps the supreme theological statement on the Incarnation in the NT. Jesus’ human life was an “emptying,” a refusal to seize the prerogatives of his deity (“did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped”).<\/p>\n<p>Paul described Christ as a second Adam (Rom 5:12-19; 1 Cor 15:45-47), who brought humanity a new possibility to attain what Adam had forsaken. Through assuming the form of a man, Christ became the Redeemer who reconciles people to God (Rom 3:25; 2 Cor 5:19; 1 Tm 1:15). Paul stressed even more, however, that the exalted Christ provides newness of life (Rom 6:4-6; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Col 3:1-4). A hymn in the Letter to the Colossians (1:15-20) employs ideas from Jewish wisdom speculation, and possibly Greek themes, to show Christ as the “firstborn” and the “fullness of God.” The one who always existed as God, through his sacrificial death, became the exalted Lord and brought humankind to God (see also the “flesh-spirit” theme in Rom 1:3-4; 1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<h5>Hebrews<\/h5>\n<p>The Letter to the Hebrews strongly speaks of the Incarnation. The opening hymn (Heb 1:1-3) accents Christ’s exalted status as “the very stamp” of God’s image and the radiance of his glory. Christ is superior to the angels (1:4-9), yet he became a man in order to suffer for human salvation (2:9; 5:7-9). The Incarnation is aligned with sinful humankind’s need for a Savior. The purpose of Hebrews is to show Christ’s incomparable superiority to the OT sacrifices, and at the same time to stress his work of salvation. His real temptation (2:18; 4:15) combined with his sinlessness (4:15; 5:9; 7:26) is the human remedy for human sin. The Incarnation was Christ’s path to final, once-for-all atonement and victory over sin (7:28; 9:26).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalDevelopment\">Historical Development<\/p>\n<p>The first group to challenge the traditional doctrine of incarnation was the Gnostics, who in the late first century denied that Jesus was truly human. Their Greek belief that the physical creation was evil led them to deny the Incarnation. They believed Christ to be a quasi-spiritual being who merely appeared human. The theologian Marcion (d. c. 160), trained by Gnostic teachers, also accepted a docetic interpretation of Christ (his humanity was only apparent). Marcion taught his doctrine as an antidote to the OT or Jewish-oriented Christianity in his day. After his excommunication in <span>AD<\/span> 144, Marcion founded his own church, and his views were widely disseminated in the next two centuries. Partly in reaction to Marcion’s christological heresy, the orthodox churches unified their doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>The next challenge to the orthodox view came through the Arian, Apollinarian, and Nestorian controversies in the third and fourth centuries. Arianism held that the Incarnation was total, so that Christ the Logos was no longer fully God. At the same time, he was not fully human, so Christ was someone between two natures. The Council of Nicaea (<span>AD<\/span> 325) affirmed that Jesus was indeed both God and man. A further question soon arose, however, as to the relation between his two natures. Apollinarius (310?–390?) taught that only the body of Jesus was human; his soul was absorbed completely into the divine Logos. Nestorius (c. 381–451) taught that the two natures must always remain distinct in the person of Christ; they functioned together but were separate in his being. The Council of Chalcedon (<span>AD<\/span> 451) affirmed the unity of the two natures in Jesus. Many opponents of Chalcedon arose, called Monophysites, who believed in one divine nature in Jesus, who was only in a sense human. That movement caused serious political and religious divisions, and the Council of Constantinople (680–81) reaffirmed Chalcedon and established the orthodox incarnation theology.<\/p>\n<p>In the eighth century, Spain and France were centers of the “adoptionist” controversy. Adoptionism taught that at birth Jesus was human, but at his baptism he underwent a “second birth” and was “adopted” as Son of God. It was condemned in a series of synods and never gained many adherents until modern times. During the scholastic age, Peter Lombard (1095?–1160) advocated what became known as “nihilism.” The Incarnation supposedly caused no fundamental change in Jesus’ deity, but his human nature was both insubstantial and unessential. That view likewise was condemned by Pope Alexander III (1159–81). Another debate at that time centered on the relationship between the fall and the Incarnation. Thomas Aquinas (1224–74) concluded that there was a cause-effect connection; the Incarnation was necessitated by sin rather than predestined apart from the fall.<\/p>\n<p>The Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers follow basically the same orthodox teaching about the Incarnation. The conflict in the Reformation centered more on soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Several aberrant antitrinitarian movements took advantage of the breakdown in ecclesiastical authority, however. Michael Servetus (1511–53) taught a pantheistic view of the Incarnation, focused on the divine Spirit becoming manifest in the human form of Jesus. Thus the Logos is not a distinct person in the Godhead, nor is it fundamentally different from a “divine spark” in every person. At the same time Laelius Socinus (1525–62) and his nephew, Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), taught a unitarian system. The Incarnation was not a transferral of the divine essence but a communication of divine authority and revelation. Christ thus did not die as an atonement but as a moral example. Both Servetus and Socinianism were condemned by Catholics and Protestants alike.<\/p>\n<p>In the 17th and 18th centuries “kenoticism” (from Greek for “empty”) taught that in the Incarnation the Logos totally “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7) of the divine attributes. That doctrine represented the final phase of a dialogue from the scholastic period about the exact communication between Jesus’ two natures. Was his human nature omnipotent? If not, how did the man Jesus exercise the divine attributes? The kenotic school believed that Jesus was fully human and that his divine nature was quiescent until after the Ascension. His miraculous powers were external, given by the Spirit. Against that view, the majority of theologians argued that Jesus was at all times both God and man, and that in Philippians 2:6-8 Jesus did not lay aside the attributes of deity (he still exhibited the “form of God”) but rather the majesty associated with deity.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th and 20th centuries have given rise to a view that the Incarnation was a “myth,” a pictorial way of describing how God spoke through Jesus. The virgin birth was not historical, nor did any of the supernatural events of the Gospels ever take place. Rather, the stories in the Gospels were concoctions of the later church, efforts to portray Jesus’ impact on the movement. The Gospels, however, have too strong a flavor of accurate history for such a view to prevail (see Lk 1:1-5; Jn 19:35; 21:24).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Conclusion\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p>The NT teaching on the Incarnation balances the humanity and divinity of Christ. Those two facts must harmonize in any theological system, for both are absolutely necessary parts of God’s redemptive plan. In the Incarnation, Jesus became a perfect human being. As God in human flesh, he suffered the divine penalty for sin as an innocent substitute. Being both God and man, Jesus simultaneously revealed God’s will for human life and reconciled sinful people to God through his own perfect life and death. Because of the Incarnation, therefore, those who believe in Christ have peace with God and new life from God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Life and Teachings of; Genealogy of Jesus Christ; Virgin Birth of Jesus.<\/p>","summary_ro":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","summary_en":"INCARNATION* Literally, “in flesh”; theologically, the doctrine that in Jesus of Nazareth God took on human flesh and became the God-man. Historically, the doctrine of incarnation was central in the christological debates of patristic times and has recently come to the fore again in academic circles. Biblically, it expresses the mystery of Jesus’ identity. New Testament Testimony The Synoptic Gospels The Gospel of Mark has no account of the Incarnation and stresses Jesus’ messiahship more tha...","source":"Articles\/I.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24302,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Maranatha*","title_en":"Maranatha*","content_ro":"<h3>MARANATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic expression used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22, meaning either “Our Lord, come!” or “Our Lord has come.”<\/p>\n<p>Quite certainly the use of <em>maranatha<\/em> (cf. <em>amen<\/em> and <em>abba<\/em>) originated in the worship services of early Jewish Christians whose mother tongue was Aramaic. Since Paul wrote in the Greek language, he needed to transliterate (writing the Aramaic phrase with Greek letters), a process that sometimes creates ambiguities. In addition, words were not written separately in ancient documents. Therefore, since <em>maranatha<\/em> consists of two words, it can be analyzed in different ways.<\/p>\n<p>Most scholars agree that the first word in the phrase is <em>maran<\/em> or <em>marana,<\/em> meaning “Lord,” or more probably “our Lord,” and that the second word represents the Aramaic verb “to come.” This verb, however, may be taken either as a prayer (imperative <em>tha<\/em> or <em>etha,<\/em> “come!”) or as a statement (perfect tense <em>atha<\/em> “has come”). Five different interpretations are then possible: (1) If the words are considered as a prayer, Paul is praying for either Jesus’ spiritual presence, with possible reference to the Lord’s Supper, or (2) Jesus’ second coming. As a statement, the expression may refer to the Incarnation; it may be translated (3, 4) “Our Lord is present,” either with reference to the Lord’s Supper or to Jesus’ more general promise in Matthew 18:20; or (5) it may be translated “Our Lord is coming” (the so-called “prophetic perfect,” although some prominent Aramaic scholars argue that this is not really possible).<\/p>\n<p>In support of rendering the expression as a statement (“our Lord has come”) is the fact that the Syriac (a form of Aramaic) version translates the verb in the perfect tense; further, the early church fathers usually interpreted it the same way. A majority of scholars, however, believe that such an interpretation does not fit the context well. Further, if the phrase is understood as a prayer, it can be related to other passages (Phil 4:5b; 1 Pt 4:7; cf. Rv 22:20b, which may be a translation of <em>maranatha<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that <em>maranatha<\/em> occurs immediately after Paul’s imprecatory curse (1 Cor 16:22) has led many to the view that the Aramaic expression is part of the curse itself. The <span>kjv<\/span> rendering (“let him be Anathema Maran-atha”) leaves the impression that the two words are a unit, whereas <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> is a Greek word meaning “curse” and probably ends the sentence. It is nevertheless quite possible, some modern scholars believe, to relate <em>maranatha<\/em> very closely to the curse, since the prayer for Jesus to come in judgment reinforces the solemnity and reality of Paul’s imprecation. Interestingly, a church council in the seventh century anathematizes dissidents with the words “anathema maranatha, let him be condemned at the Lord’s coming.”<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARANATHA*<\/h3>\n<p>Aramaic expression used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22, meaning either “Our Lord, come!” or “Our Lord has come.”<\/p>\n<p>Quite certainly the use of <em>maranatha<\/em> (cf. <em>amen<\/em> and <em>abba<\/em>) originated in the worship services of early Jewish Christians whose mother tongue was Aramaic. Since Paul wrote in the Greek language, he needed to transliterate (writing the Aramaic phrase with Greek letters), a process that sometimes creates ambiguities. In addition, words were not written separately in ancient documents. Therefore, since <em>maranatha<\/em> consists of two words, it can be analyzed in different ways.<\/p>\n<p>Most scholars agree that the first word in the phrase is <em>maran<\/em> or <em>marana,<\/em> meaning “Lord,” or more probably “our Lord,” and that the second word represents the Aramaic verb “to come.” This verb, however, may be taken either as a prayer (imperative <em>tha<\/em> or <em>etha,<\/em> “come!”) or as a statement (perfect tense <em>atha<\/em> “has come”). Five different interpretations are then possible: (1) If the words are considered as a prayer, Paul is praying for either Jesus’ spiritual presence, with possible reference to the Lord’s Supper, or (2) Jesus’ second coming. As a statement, the expression may refer to the Incarnation; it may be translated (3, 4) “Our Lord is present,” either with reference to the Lord’s Supper or to Jesus’ more general promise in Matthew 18:20; or (5) it may be translated “Our Lord is coming” (the so-called “prophetic perfect,” although some prominent Aramaic scholars argue that this is not really possible).<\/p>\n<p>In support of rendering the expression as a statement (“our Lord has come”) is the fact that the Syriac (a form of Aramaic) version translates the verb in the perfect tense; further, the early church fathers usually interpreted it the same way. A majority of scholars, however, believe that such an interpretation does not fit the context well. Further, if the phrase is understood as a prayer, it can be related to other passages (Phil 4:5b; 1 Pt 4:7; cf. Rv 22:20b, which may be a translation of <em>maranatha<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>The fact that <em>maranatha<\/em> occurs immediately after Paul’s imprecatory curse (1 Cor 16:22) has led many to the view that the Aramaic expression is part of the curse itself. The <span>kjv<\/span> rendering (“let him be Anathema Maran-atha”) leaves the impression that the two words are a unit, whereas <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">anathema<\/span> is a Greek word meaning “curse” and probably ends the sentence. It is nevertheless quite possible, some modern scholars believe, to relate <em>maranatha<\/em> very closely to the curse, since the prayer for Jesus to come in judgment reinforces the solemnity and reality of Paul’s imprecation. Interestingly, a church council in the seventh century anathematizes dissidents with the words “anathema maranatha, let him be condemned at the Lord’s coming.”<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARANATHA* Aramaic expression used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22, meaning either “Our Lord, come!” or “Our Lord has come.” Quite certainly the use of maranatha (cf. amen and abba) originated in the worship services of early Jewish Christians whose mother tongue was Aramaic. Since Paul wrote in the Greek language, he needed to transliterate (writing the Aramaic phrase with Greek letters), a process that sometimes creates ambiguities. In addition, words were not written separately in ancient d...","summary_en":"MARANATHA* Aramaic expression used by Paul in 1 Corinthians 16:22, meaning either “Our Lord, come!” or “Our Lord has come.” Quite certainly the use of maranatha (cf. amen and abba) originated in the worship services of early Jewish Christians whose mother tongue was Aramaic. Since Paul wrote in the Greek language, he needed to transliterate (writing the Aramaic phrase with Greek letters), a process that sometimes creates ambiguities. In addition, words were not written separately in ancient d...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54858,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","summary_en":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82484,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","summary_en":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110110,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","summary_en":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137736,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:20<\/strong> Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","summary_en":"18:20 Christ is present in the process of discipline, so the process is a ratification of God’s decision.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64665,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67213,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92291,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94839,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119917,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122465,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147543,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem","title_en":"Worship in Jerusalem","content_ro":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Worship in Jerusalem<\/h3>\n<p>The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the north, Jeroboam, established alternative worship centers and discouraged his people from going to Jerusalem to worship. Over time, various worship sites were constructed—in the north and the south. But no matter how many sacrifices were offered or how elaborate the rituals performed there (5:4-5), these were not the places for worship God had chosen.<\/p>\n<p>In the New Testament, worship is no longer tied to a particular location; worship may occur wherever believers choose to gather (see Matt 18:20). But it must be conducted as God directs: “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:23-24). In both the Old and New Testaments, an emphasis is placed upon the authenticity of worship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 12:5; 1 Kgs 11:36; 2 Chr 6:6; Neh 1:9; 11:1; Isa 2:3; 52:1; 56:7; Joel 3:17; Amos 5:4-5; Zech 8:20-22; Matt 4:5; Luke 19:46; John 2:16; 4:21-24; Heb 12:18-29; Rev 21:2, 10; 22:19<\/p>","summary_ro":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","summary_en":"Worship in Jerusalem The Old Testament prophets realized that genuine worship depends on a proper understanding of God and his requirements. God had determined that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the central location of worship for his people. The Lord roared from Zion and thundered from Jerusalem (1:2). It was unacceptable for the Israelites to set up a central worship site in any place other than his authorized Temple in Jerusalem. But after the Israelite kingdom divided, the king of the ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150091,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple","title_en":"The Church as God’s Temple","content_ro":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Church as God’s Temple<\/h3>\n<p>The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 <span>BC<\/span> but was destroyed in 586 <span>BC<\/span>. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7; Ezek 40–43).<\/p>\n<p>While the Temple in Jerusalem was rebuilt after the Exile—and reached a pinnacle during the renovations of Herod the Great—the hopes of God’s people were ultimately fulfilled in the coming of Jesus (see John 1:14; 2:19-22; 4:21-24). He himself is God’s temple, the place where God’s holiness resides, and he calls his people to join him. Thus, God’s people are to be a holy temple of God, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12).<\/p>\n<p>Paul called on believers to realize their identity as God’s “holy people” (2 Cor 1:1) in two ways: They were to separate themselves from moral evil, and they were to be dedicated to God in holy living and service. Christians are therefore urged, “Let us cleanse ourselves from everything that can defile our body or spirit. And let us work toward complete holiness because we fear God” (2 Cor 7:1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 8:12-53; 2 Chr 6:20; Pss 11:4; 27:4-6; Zech 6:12-15; Matt 18:20; John 2:18-22; 14:20; 17:23; Rom 8:10; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 6:18-20; 9:11-14; 2 Cor 6:14–7:1; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:20-22; 3:17-19; Col 1:27; Heb 3:6; 12:18-24; 1 Pet 2:4-9; Rev 1:12-16; 3:12, 20; 21:22<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","summary_en":"The Church as God’s Temple The imagery of the church as the temple of God has its roots in the Old Testament. David and Solomon received a promise that the Temple in Jerusalem would be the place of God’s abiding presence with his people (see 2 Sam 7:12-16; 1 Kgs 9:1-9). That Temple was completed in 960 BC but was destroyed in 586 BC. Yet the prophets of Israel looked forward to a new temple; they announced a message of hope that God would once again live among his people (see, e.g., Isa 56:7;...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":42161,"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":69787,"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":97413,"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":125039,"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":12762,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24792,"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":30030,"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":54859,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","summary_en":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82485,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","summary_en":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110111,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","summary_en":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137737,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:21-35<\/strong> Peter’s suggestion of <em>seven times<\/em> was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","summary_en":"18:21-35 Peter’s suggestion of seven times was generous, so Jesus’ answer was startling. The disciple’s willingness to forgive should be like God’s forgiving grace, limitless and free (see 18:10-14). Those who do not forgive in this way cannot themselves have experienced God’s forgiveness (18:35; see 6:12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":67994,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":95620,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":123246,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":150872,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Symbolic Numbers","title_en":"Symbolic Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Symbolic Numbers<\/h3>\n<p>Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events.<\/p>\n<p>The number <em>one<\/em> can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). <em>Two<\/em> is the minimum number required to give a legitimate witness (Deut 17:6; Rev 11:3), and <em>three<\/em> can imply divine representation (Gen 18:1-2; 2 Cor 13:14; Rev 1:4-5). <em>Four<\/em> can stand for the known world, represented in Revelation by living creatures, horsemen, winds, and angels (Rev 4:6-8; 6:1-8; 7:1) and in Genesis by <em>four<\/em> rivers (Gen 2:10-14). When <em>three<\/em> and <em>four<\/em> are added to make <em>seven,<\/em> they represent perfection or divine fulfillment, indicating that God and the world are in harmony. The multiplication of <em>three<\/em> by <em>four<\/em> yields <em>twelve,<\/em> the number associated with God’s people (Gen 35:22-26; Exod 24:4; 28:21; Num 17:2; Josh 4:3-8; 1 Kgs 18:31; Matt 10:1-4; 19:28; Jas 1:1; Rev 12:1; 21:12–22:2. The number <em>five<\/em> and its multiples, such as <em>ten,<\/em> represent human completeness (e.g., <em>five<\/em> fingers per hand); and <em>six<\/em> carries a negative sense or implication of evil, being neither humanly complete (<em>five<\/em>) nor divinely complete (<em>seven<\/em>).<\/p>\n<p>Multiples of <em>ten<\/em> (e.g., <em>forty<\/em>) are a symbolic way to indicate <em>many<\/em>, whereas <em>three sixes<\/em> (666) imply supreme evil (Rev 13:18). <em>One thousand<\/em> is regarded as the foundational large number; 12,000 indicates a large number of God’s people (Rev 7:5-8); and 144,000 represents the complete people of God (Rev 7:4; 14:1). The number 10,000 and its multiples are probably best transliterated from Greek as <em>myriads<\/em>, since they really mean “a huge number” rather than a precise count.<\/p>\n<p>While some of the numbers in the Bible have symbolic meanings, using numbers to speculate on the time of Christ’s return or of the end of the world is highly dubious—only God possesses that knowledge (Mark 13:32). God did not intend for the symbolic numbers in Revelation to help us predict the future; rather, their symbolic meanings help to explain the significance of the visions. Because the numbers are symbolic, sometimes when we translate them into contemporary sizes, distances, and numbers for our ease of reading, it can result in the loss of theological significance. The use of these symbolic numbers can illuminate a vision’s relationship to the world or to the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 2:2-3; 4:15; 15:13; 41:53-54; Exod 20:6; 25:31-37; 32:15; Lev 16:14; 23:16; 2 Sam 24:13; 1 Kgs 4:26; 17:21; 18:31, 43-44; Job 1:2; Ps 90:4; Jer 15:3; 49:36; Ezek 14:21; Dan 4:16, 23-25; 7:3, 17, 24; Zech 4:2; 6:1; Matt 10:1-5; 12:40; 18:21-22; Mark 6:7; Luke 15:8; Acts 6:3; 10:16; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:4-6; 2 Pet 3:8; Rev 1:16; 2:10; 4:4; 6:1; 7:1, 4-8; 12:1, 3; 13:1; 17:3-14; 20:2-7; 21:12-21<\/p>","summary_ro":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","summary_en":"Symbolic Numbers Numbers used in Scripture have often inspired wild speculation. An understanding of the symbolism of numbers in the ancient world can help ground our interpretation. Such symbolism, however, is not rigid or exact, so great care must be exercised when numbers are used in interpretation, so as not to push fanciful predictions about future events. The number one can refer to God’s oneness (Deut 6:4; Gal 3:20; Jas 2:19). Two is the minimum number required to give a legitimate wit...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":22428,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Lamech","title_en":"Lamech","content_ro":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAMECH<\/h3>\n<li>1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsmen, musicians, and metalworkers. His song of vengeance (vv 23-24) is an example of early Hebrew poetry. In the song Lamech declares that he has killed a man for wounding him and compares the act to his forebear Cain’s slaying of Abel (cf. vv 8-12). He asserts that “if anyone who kills Cain is to be punished seven times, anyone who takes revenge against me will be punished seventy-seven times!” Lamech’s song indicates that, as civilization became more complex, pride and the propensity for violence increased. Jesus’ word about forgiving “seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) stands in sharp contrast to Lamech’s example.<\/li>\n<li>2. Methuselah’s son, and the father of Noah (Gn 5:25-31; 1 Chr 1:3). When Noah was born, Lamech expressed his hope that the child would bring relief to humanity from the curse placed upon Adam (Gn 5:29; cf. 3:17). His life span—777 years—is one of the longest in the listing of those who lived before the Flood. Fanciful conversations in old age between Lamech and his father, Methuselah, are recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Lamech is listed as an ancestor of Jesus in the genealogy recorded in Luke 3:36.<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Genealogy of Jesus Christ.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","summary_en":"LAMECH 1. Methushael’s son, a descendant of Cain, and the husband of Adah and Zillah. Lamech’s sons by Adah were Jabal, “the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock,” and Jubal, “the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe.” A son, Tubal-cain, “the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron,” and a daughter, Naamah, were Lamech’s children by Zillah (Gn 4:18-22). In the account of beginnings given in the early chapters of Genesis, the sons of Lamech are the first herdsme...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":27689,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Numerology*, Numbers","title_en":"and Numerology*, Numbers","content_ro":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY*<\/h3>\n<p>Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mystical, pre-Christian Jewish groups, and later carried to extremes by the Kabbalists.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>• Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>• Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>• Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>• Numerology<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionofNumbers\">Expression of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Hebrew, and indeed any other Semitic language, has a simple but adequate system of numeration. The number one is an adjective. After that, the numerals are nouns, in parallel masculine and feminine forms, although the masculine is used with the feminine noun and vice versa. Ordinal numbers (first, second, third, etc.) exist alongside cardinal numbers (one, two, three), but as in most languages, the second set can be used instead of the first (“day two” instead of “second day”). From ten to nineteen, there is one composite form built like English “thirteen” (“three-ten”), but “twenty” is literally “tens” (the plural of “ten”). Thirty, forty, and so on are literally “threes,” “fours” (the plural of the words “three” and “four,” respectively) and so on, up to a hundred, which is a new word. There are also separate words for “thousand” and for “ten thousand,” as in Greek, Chinese, and many other languages. Larger numbers must be expressed by multiples of these (“ten thousand times ten thousand” and “thousands of thousands”), suggesting that large figures, rarely needed for small populations and tiny kingdoms, were expressed approximately. Hebrew has not only a singular and plural but also a dual form to express two of anything (two hundred, two thousand). Fractions (a half, a third, a tenth, etc.) could be expressed, and multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction were used. Indeed, instances of all four operations can be found in the Bible. The Hebrew mathematical system was basically part of the larger western Asian mathematical system, of which we know a great deal from Mesopotamia and Egypt. These countries, however, used a more highly developed mathematical system than Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"WaysofWritingNumerals\">Ways of Writing Numerals<\/p>\n<p>In the Bible, numbers are always written out in words, as on the famous Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription. But every nation in the ancient world could also express numbers by using figures or ciphers of various kinds (like our 1, 2, 3, . . .). Because of this danger of error, in later days numbers were normally written out in full, in words, where confusion, although still possible, was not nearly so likely. An additional way of writing numbers, known both to the Hebrews and the Greeks, was the use of consecutive letters of the alphabet instead of consecutive numerals (as if we used A for 1, B for 2, etc.). This system, in wide use by NT times, is the usual system in modern Hebrew and has the advantage that numerical combinations can be pronounced by inserting arbitrary vowels, thus making artificial words. For example, if the number of the beast (Rv 13:18), 666, is expressed in alphabetical letters, it can spell out the consonants of “Nero Caesar,” although other names are possible, especially if the variant reading 616 is used.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ProblemsofLargeNumbers\">Problems of Large Numbers<\/p>\n<p>Even allowing for all these possibilities, there remain certain problems connected with large numbers, particularly in the OT. The most obvious is that of the ten long-lived patriarchs, whose ages are recorded in Genesis 5. Different figures (varying by whole centuries) are recorded for their ages in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan text, and the earliest Greek translation (known as the Septuagint), but all figures are very large. Some interpret these figures literally and point out that there is a steady reduction from the ages attained by these patriarchs to the more modest 120 years allotted to man in Noah’s time (Gn 6:3) and the 70 years accepted later as the human life span (Ps 90:10). This would correspond to the progressive spiritual deterioration of mankind after the fall, from the perfect state of Adam to the present condition. Whatever the explanation of the figures, there is no doubt that this is the theological intent of the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>The large number of Israelites who left Egypt is also problematic. If there were actually 600,000 fighting men (Nm 1:46), this would correspond to a whole nation of some 2 million or more. Possibly the word translated “thousand” means “clan units”; it would clearly be a much smaller total body, whatever its exact size. Of course, God could have maintained any number of people in the desert. The evidence of archaeology as to the population of Canaan both before and after the Israelite onslaught seems to support a lower number. The same principle might explain the large numbers given for the fighting men of the various Israelite tribes, and the huge totals for Israel and Judah’s military strength given at later times in the historical books of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>To the ordinary Bible reader, perhaps one of the biggest problems is the different numbers recorded in Chronicles and Kings, when the same incidents are being described. Manuscript errors, or confusion of numbers written by signs or single letters of the alphabet, may account for numerous individual inconsistencies, but not for wholesale differences, particularly as the figures in Chronicles are consistently much larger. These very large round numbers may have symbolic significance and may not be intended to be taken in their literal sense at all. Indeed, since the Jews had before them the book of Kings and the book of Chronicles at the same time, they can hardly have taken both sets of numbers literally themselves.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CountingbyGenerations\">Counting by Generations<\/p>\n<p>One of the problems of the OT is that of the dating of events. Even with an exact number system, there is no absolute fixed point from which to reckon. Later Jews and Christians counted from the presumed date of the Creation. Not until after the time of David and Solomon are both internal reference between the comparative dates of kings of Judah and Israel and external reference to monarchs outside Israel used. This open-endedness accounts for the vague period of “forty years” used so often in the OT (e.g., the book of Judges) for any long but indeterminate period of time, almost certainly corresponding to a generation (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">dor<\/span>). Counting by generations is specific in some places in the Bible and may be implicit in others. For instance, Abraham’s descendants are to return to Canaan “in the fourth generation” (Gn 15:16), and the genealogy of Christ is neatly constructed on a pattern of three groups of fourteen generations (Mt 1:17), rather than on periods of years. Wherever people use and recite genealogies, such counting by generations is natural. But Abraham’s descendants are said to have returned to Canaan approximately four centuries later (Gal 3:17), and therefore the word “generation” sometimes stands for 100 years. The Hebrew word for “generation” may mean 120 years (Gn 6:3). Usually, the ancient Hebrews used vague phrases like “in those days” or “after those days” or “the days are coming,” which expressed past, present, and future without any specific mention of number. In other words, the Bible writers were more concerned with theology than with mathematics.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ApproximateUseofNumbers\">Approximate Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In the OT, Israel’s 40 years in the desert is a good example of the approximate use of numbers (Nm 14:33). In the NT, Jesus was in the wilderness 40 days during the temptation (Mt 4:2), and there were 40 days between his resurrection and ascension (Acts 1:3). Moses was 40 years old at his call (Acts 7:23), apparently lived 40 years in Midian (Ex 7:7), and spent 40 years leading Israel out of Egypt and through the desert (Dt 34:7), for he is said to be 120 years old at his death. However, two generations of 40 years is the normal maximum for a healthy man (Ps 90:10), and even this is often shortened to 70 years by the rigors of life. Seventy is also used at times in this approximate sense.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"SymbolicUseofNumbers\">Symbolic Use of Numbers<\/p>\n<p>In Scripture, seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. On the seventh day God rested from his labors and creation is finished (Gn 2:2). Pharaoh in his dream saw seven cattle coming from the Nile (41:2). Samson’s sacred Nazirite locks were braided in seven plaits (Jgs 16:13). Seven devils left Mary of Magdala, signifying the totality of her previous possession by Satan (Lk 8:2); “seven other devils” will enter the purified but vacant life of a person (Mt 12:45). However, on the positive side, there were the seven spirits of God (Rv 3:1). In the seventh year the Hebrew slave was to be freed (Ex 21:2), having completed his time of captivity and service. Every seventh year was a sabbatical year (Lv 25:4). Seven times seven reiterates the sense of completeness. In the Year of Jubilee (at the completion of 7 x 7 years = the 50th year), all land is freed and returns to the original owners (Lv 25:10). Pentecost, the Feast of Weeks, is seven times seven days after Passover. “Seventy,” which is literally “sevens” in Hebrew, strengthens the concept of perfection. There are 70 elders (Ex 24:1) in Israel. Israel was exiled to Babylon for 70 years (Jer 25:12) to complete its punishment. “Seventy times seven” (Mt 18:22) reiterates this still further. The Lord was not giving Peter a mathematical number of times that he should forgive another person, but rather was insisting on limitless forgiveness for a brother’s sin.<\/p>\n<p>“Three” may well share in this meaning of completion or perfection, although not so forcibly (2 Kgs 13:18). Many things happen “on the third day” (Hos 6:2). Jonah spent three days in the stomach of the fish (Mt 12:40), and the Lord rose again on the third day (1 Cor 15:4). David was offered a choice of divine punishments—three years, three months, three days (2 Sm 24:13). For the Christian, “three” takes on a far deeper significance as the number of Persons of the Trinity. The three Persons are clearly expressed, for instance, in the Great Commission (Mt 28:19) and in the Pauline benediction (2 Cor 13:13). Many echoes of this threefold expression are in the NT, and many anticipations of it in the OT, of which the thrice-repeated “Holy” in Isaiah 6:3 is the most famous.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars see four as another symbol of completeness (four winds of heaven, Dn 7:2; four horsemen, Rv 6:1-7; four living creatures around the throne of God, Rv 4:6). Five is certainly used in an indefinite sense as a small number (Is 19:18; 30:17). Nor do eight or nine seem to have any special significance, although, like other numbers, they may be used in a factual sense to describe any of God’s activities (nine plagues on Egypt, Ex 7–10). “Ten” does have significance because of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:1-17), but not any special symbolism earlier in the Bible. If anything, “ten” is elsewhere used in a vague way. Laban changes Jacob’s wages ten times (Gn 31:7); Daniel and his friends are ten times better than all other students (Dn 1:20); ten times over, the Jewish settlers will be warned of impending enemy attacks (Neh 4:12).<\/p>\n<p>Eleven appears to have no special biblical significance, but 12 certainly has. The clearest proof of this is the existence of the 12 tribes in Israel. In Revelation 7:4-8, where it is mathematically important that the number of tribes be limited to 12, the tribe of Dan is altogether omitted—probably on account of Dan’s sin of idolatry (Jgs 18:14-20). Ishmael’s descendants were also divided into 12 clans (Gn 17:20), so that the number 12 was apparently significant outside Israel as well. In the NT Christ chose 12 apostles (Mt 10:1-4). The link with the number of tribes is made specific when Christ tells the apostles that they will sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes (Mt 19:28). However, it is interesting that, after the election and appointment of Matthias (Acts 1:26), the Christian church apparently made no subsequent efforts to maintain the number of apostles. Like “seven times seven,” “twelve times twelve” increases the force of the number. When this is further multiplied by a thousand, the figure becomes the 144,000 redeemed (Rv 7:4), who were sealed “out of all the tribes of Israel.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExactStatistics\">Exact Statistics<\/p>\n<p>As distinct from the metaphorical use of numbers to denote completion, immensity, and the like, numbers in Hebrew were often used to give exact tallies or measurements. Such usage is known to us only from clay tablets and ostraca (broken pieces of potsherd engraved in ink, used as rough notebooks). However, ascertaining exactly what the text was in its earliest form and what that text means is difficult.<\/p>\n<p>An example is the number of the sons of Jeconiah among the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh. They were struck down by the Lord because of their failure to rejoice with the others when God’s ark returned to Israel from the Philistine country (1 Sm 6:19). The Greek text (LXX) reads “seventy”; the later Hebrew manuscripts add “fifty thousand.” But, as Beth-shemesh itself was only a small frontier town, and the “sons of Jeconiah” was presumably only one clan among several, the smaller number is obviously the original, and the large addition due to some later manuscript confusion.<\/p>\n<p>A good rule in trying to decide whether a number is statistical or impressionistic is to determine whether it is a small number, or an unusual number for which there is no obvious theological explanation. When the men of Ai killed some 36 Israelites at the first assault on the city (Jos 7:5), the smallness of the number is evidence that this is a vividly remembered factual detail. Similarly, in the case of the number of Abraham’s 318 men (Gn 14:14) or the catch of 153 fish after the resurrection (Jn 21:11), the numbers, though large, are not round numbers but unusual combinations, and are obviously meant in a literal or statistical sense. Irrelevant details like this have a habit of remaining in the memory, and are the best guarantee of the trustworthiness of the narrative.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Numerology\">Numerology<\/p>\n<p>Numerology may be said to be an extended application of the metaphorical significance of numbers (7, 40, etc.) already discussed. In the Bible, this systematization of numbers always goes with a strong sense of the sovereignty of God, his control over human history, and a belief in his ongoing purpose and its triumphant conclusion.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps the first clear instance of numerology in the Bible is 1 Kings 6:1, where Solomon began to build the temple 480 years after the exodus, a period 5 times 10 times 12, or 4 times 120, the ideal life span of man in early days (Gn 6:3). First Chronicles 6:3-8 gives 12 generations of men (presumably 40 years each) to cover the same period, so “twelve generations” is probably the real basis for the computation, rather than any exact year-by-year tally. A tally would have been impossible in the days of the judges and unlikely before the monarchy. David was the first to establish an official scribe or recorder to keep daily annals in Israel (2 Sm 8:16-17), as was common in the great kingdoms from far earlier times. Such Israelite annals are later mentioned as sources of the books of the kings (2 Kgs 14:18). The number 480 is probably a rough approximation rather than exact and denotes the end of one of God’s epochs.<\/p>\n<p>When Jeremiah prophesies an exile of 70 years for Judah (Jer 25:11; 29:10), it is not only a historical prediction that was literally fulfilled but also a symbol of completeness; Judah’s punishment is complete (cf. Is 40:2). Isaiah (Is 23:15) had made a similar prophecy of a 70-year punishment for Tyre, and Ezekiel (Ez 29:11-13) prophesied a 40-year “exile” for Egypt. When these 70 years are regarded as sabbatical years, where the land must lie untilled to compensate for the 7 times 70 years of sin before, then true numerology begins (2 Chr 36:21). Here numerology is used only as an explanation of past and present, but it can also be used to explain the future, especially in the book of Daniel.<\/p>\n<p>Daniel (Dn 9:2) refers to the literal 70 years of the exile as foretold by Jeremiah. In Daniel 9:24, this has been extended to 70 weeks of years (490 years) applied to the distant future. Daniel 9:25 sees 69 of these (483 years) as elapsing before Messiah appears. Presumably, the last week of the 70 is therefore thought of as the time of his activity. However this may be interpreted in terms of actual dates, it must be harmonized with 9:26, where the Messiah is “cut off” after 62 weeks of years (434 years). The difficulty lies in establishing the starting point for this long period. This is an example of an elaborate numerology, embracing centuries of history, all ultimately based on the 70 years of Jeremiah. According to biblical principles, this can have both an “immediate” fulfillment in the return from exile, and a “prophetic” fulfillment in the far distant future in connection with the coming of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The other major example of extended numerology in Daniel is in connection with the “time, times, and half a time” (7:25). This must stand for three and a half “times,” that is, half of seven “times.” Thus, it refers either to three and a half years (half a “week” of years) or three and a half “weeks” of years (cf. “seven times” in 4:16, where “seven years” is clearly meant). Whatever may be its ultimate prophetic fulfillment in Christ, the “initial” or “partial” fulfillment is the roughly three and a half years of bitter persecution of God’s people by Antiochus Epiphanes (167–164 <span>BC<\/span>). This figure of three and a half years reappears in Revelation 11:2 (“forty-two months”), and 12:14 (“a time, and times, and half a time”), to describe the period of Rome’s persecution of the Christian church. The figure had possibly become a symbol of any bitter but limited persecution. The “two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings” of Daniel 8:14 may mean 1,150 days, which is approximately the same length of time.<\/p>\n<p>The three and a half years of Daniel 7:25 reappear in Revelation 11 in the form of “forty-two months,” the time when the heathen will trample down Jerusalem (Rv 11:2). The 1,290 days of Daniel 12:11 reappear here (in the slightly different form of 1,260 days) as the time that God’s two witnesses will prophesy (Rv 11:3). The 42 months reappear in Revelation 13:5 as the period that the wild beast will be allowed to blaspheme. While the “thousand years” of 20:6 is not derived from Daniel at all, the metaphorical use of “thousand” is familiar to the OT. The closest direct parallel is in Deuteronomy 7:9, where God’s covenant will be kept with a “thousand generations” to come.<\/p>","summary_ro":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","summary_en":"NUMBERS AND NUMEROLOGY* Individual numbers have a symbolic as well as a literal sense in the Bible. In Daniel, and to a lesser extent in Revelation, there is a developed system of numerology where interrelated systems of numbers are used in a definite pattern. Traditionally, conservative Christians have been suspicious of numerology because of its unwise use by groups of Christians who see theological symbolism in every number in the OT, even the most factual. This view was inherited from mys...","source":"Articles\/N.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54860,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","summary_en":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82486,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","summary_en":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110112,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","summary_en":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137738,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:22<\/strong> <em>seventy times seven:<\/em> Or <em>seventy-seven times<\/em>; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","summary_en":"18:22 seventy times seven: Or seventy-seven times; either way, Jesus prescribes limitless readiness to forgive from the heart (18:35; cp. Gen 4:23-24).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":9176,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Debt","title_en":"Debt","content_ro":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEBT<\/h3>\n<p>Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.”<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so that borrowers never received the full value of the money. People could be ruined financially by heartless exaction of interest (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Another verb is usually translated as “increase” or “profit” (Lv 25:37), since lenders profited from others’ labor. Ancient Near Eastern interest rates on produce and goods might be as much as 30 percent of the loan per year; on money, as much as 20 percent. Clay tablets from Nuzi, an ancient town in northeastern Mesopotamia, indicate interest rates of even 50 percent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheLawofMoses\">The Law of Moses<\/p>\n<p>The Mosaic covenant given to Israel immediately after the exodus sought to eliminate extortionist practices from Hebrew life. Thus God’s revelation had many rules and restrictions relating to debt and credit in Israel.<\/p>\n<h5>Protection for the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Portions of the legislative sections of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) regulated the practice of lending in a way that protected the poor and secured each person’s right to earn a living and support a family. Many popular Hebrew proverbs dealt with that theme. The positive thrust of the biblical laws was to ensure help for the financially needy, without interest. No personal profit was to be made at the expense of the poor (Ex 22:25; Dt 23:19-20); God was their special advocate. Thus, by lending without interest, the Israelites could demonstrate their reverence for God (Lv 25:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>That point was reemphasized 40 years later when Moses renewed the covenant with Israel just before their entrance into the Promised Land. God was the landlord, and his tenants were to respect his word. God promised the Israelites that if they would lend so as to alleviate human misery, they would be unusually blessed by the Lord (Dt 15:6; 23:19-20; 28:12). Interest could be charged to a foreigner not living under the Mosaic law, which was a condition parallel to commercial treaties prevalent in the ancient Near East.<\/p>\n<p>In ancient Israel, financial ruin was frequently brought about by poor harvests. Often they were taken as an indication that the relationship between God and his people was not right (Lv 26:14, 20). The wealthy were expected to help, not to add more burdens to those who suffered from poor harvests.<\/p>\n<h5>Violation of the Law<\/h5>\n<p>The law was so often violated that eventually exorbitant interest became a social plague, making the situation of debtors hopeless. Many of the fighting men who rallied around David early in his military career were “outlaws” unable to repay their loans and interest (1 Sm 22:2). The prophet Ezekiel called people to task for their failure to observe God’s commands about usury (Ez 18:5-18; 22:12). When Nehemiah returned from the exile to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, he brought charges against the government officials whose interest rates had enslaved the people (Neh 5:6-13).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom Literature, which included Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, added that those who acquired riches by usury would not profit in the long run, because God would give their profits to others who looked after the welfare of the poor (e.g., Prv 28:8). The prophet Amos gave a similar warning to corrupt merchants in Israel: “Because you trample upon the poor and take from him exactions of wheat, . . . you have planted pleasant vineyards, but you shall not drink their wine” (Am 5:11, <span>rsv<\/span>). In spite of such warnings, the law was often ignored, and burdensome interest charges were laid on borrowers who were already poor.<\/p>\n<h5>Pledges and Surety<\/h5>\n<p>When it was necessary to borrow, the law provided alternatives to the unfair practice of usury. When taking out a loan, a borrower would surrender some movable property as collateral to ensure repayment. That “pledge” represented a tangible sign of the debtor’s intention to repay the loan. Certain restrictions applied to such pledges. For example, a creditor could not take a widow’s clothes (Dt 24:17). Tools (such as millstones) or animals (such as oxen) necessary for daily life were forbidden as pledges (v 6). Clothing absolutely essential to the borrower (e.g., to keep warm) could be temporarily offered as a pledge, but the temporary token had to be returned before nightfall (Ex 22:26-27; Dt 24:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>In drastic circumstances, where there was no collateral, a debtor could pledge a son, daughter, or slave. The value of the child’s or slave’s labor could then be credited against both interest and principal. An account in the Bible of a widow’s two sons about to go into slavery shows how cruel the custom could be (2 Kgs 4:1-7). Pledging labor or their children’s labor was the only way slaves could pay off a debt when they had to borrow.<\/p>\n<p>A borrower could also have a wealthy friend assume responsibility as a cosigner on a loan and thus become the pledge, or surety. The book of Proverbs cautioned against standing surety for others, however, especially for strangers (Prv 6:1-3; 11:15; 17:18; 22:26; 27:13).<\/p>\n<h5>Sabbatical and Jubilee Years<\/h5>\n<p>Two legal provisions to curb the enslavement of people by long-standing debts were the sabbatical year and the jubilee year. The sabbatical year, or “year of release,” took place every seventh year. At that time debts were canceled and slates wiped clean (Dt 15:1-12; cf. Ex 21:2; 23:10-11; Lv 25:2-7). The law clearly forbade lenders to withhold loans to those in desperate need during a sixth year. Jewish tradition held strict injunctions against a lender trying to collect on a loan that should have been forgiven in the sabbatical year.<\/p>\n<p>Every 50 years Israel had its Year of Jubilee. In that year land reverted to its original owner if it had not already been redeemed by some relative. That provision prevented the buildup of landed estates by the wealthy few while the many poor suffered in slavery (Lv 25:13-17). Although the Mosaic law could not guarantee economic utopia, it sought to curb the greediness in human nature. It also aimed at providing everyone with an equal opportunity and a fresh start every 50 years.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DebtintheNewTestament\">Debt in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The NT shows how various cultures handled the matter of loans and debts. There were Jewish people who adhered strictly to the Mosaic law and refused to charge their fellow Jews high interest. Hellenistic and Roman legal practices, however, penetrated parts of Jewish society.<\/p>\n<h5>Jesus’ Parables<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus alluded to non-Jewish economic practices in his parable of a servant who jailed a fellow slave for not repaying a loan (Mt 18:23-35). The parable illustrates the ordinary Hellenistic and Roman custom of jailing or restraining such a person as surety. That practice forced a debtor to sell his property, to ask family and friends to cover the loss, or to sell himself into slavery. The parable of the talents (25:14-28) and the parable of the pounds (Lk 19:12-24), speaking allegorically about the kingdom of God, mention earning interest on money invested with bankers.<\/p>\n<h5>Economic and Theological Instruction<\/h5>\n<p>The apostle Paul instructed Christians to “owe nothing to anyone” (Rom 13:8), which means at the very least that Christians should make good on loans promptly. On the other hand, a Christian’s economic activity should be characterized by kindness toward those in need, generosity, and willingness to help (Mt 5:42; Lk 6:35).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also presents a number of lessons in doctrine based on a figurative use of “debts” and “debtors.” Jesus once referred to sinners (Lk 13:2) with a word literally meaning “debtors” (v 4). In the Lord’s Prayer “debts” is paralleled with “sins” (Mt 6:12; Lk 11:4).<\/p>\n<p>Sin is seen as an enslavement (Jn 8:34), and all men and women as debtors to God. Redemption can be made only by God, who “gave his only Son” to set people free (3:16-18). The writer to the Hebrews showed that Jesus was made the surety of the new covenant (Heb 7:22).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle Paul felt indebted to all people because of his own salvation, a debt he could pay by preaching the gospel (Rom 1:14-15). The NT teaches that all who receive the gospel are likewise in debt and therefore should devote themselves to serving others as a way of serving God (cf. 15:26-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Banker, Banking; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","summary_en":"DEBT Something owed to another person, such as goods, property, or money. In the Bible, righteous conduct is something one “owes” to God; hence, in theology, sin is described figuratively as being “in debt.” In Hebrew culture, debt was usually connected with usury (the business of lending money on interest). The Hebrew verbs describing usury picture a painful situation. One word for usury means “to bite,” a vivid image for the way high interest “ate up” any kind of business transaction so tha...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":12737,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Forgiveness","title_en":"Forgiveness","content_ro":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FORGIVENESS<\/h3>\n<p>Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p>In other religions, forgiveness does not have the same force. In animism, there is no awareness of a personal relationship with God. In Hinduism, all have to pay the inexorable consequences of karma in the wheel of reincarnations. Buddhism likewise knows nothing of a forgiving God. The idea is present in Islam, but there is no personal God and Father. Even in Judaism, forgiveness remains a limited experience, though forgiveness as developed in the NT adds dimension to the teaching of the OT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ExpressionsofForgivenessintheOldTestament\">Expressions of Forgiveness in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>The idea of forgiveness is expressed in various metaphors. The command is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nasa<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “send away,” as the scapegoat was sent away into the wilderness to bear the sins of the Israelites. It is also rendered “to be merciful” (Lv 4:20; 1 Kgs 8:30, 34; Pss 86:5; 103:3). The Hebrew word <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kapar<\/span> is commonly used of atonement, meaning “to cover up,” as the sacrifice was offered to cover the deficiency of the worshiper (Ex 29:36; Dt 21:8; Jer 18:23; Ez 43:20; 45:20). Cognates of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">salah<\/span> always refer to God’s act of forgiveness (Nm 30:5, 8, 12; Pss 86:5; 130:4; Dn 9:9). God lets go of the transgression; he removes it. Another expression is <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">maha<\/span><em>,<\/em> to “wipe away” (Ps 51:1, 7; Is 43:25; 44:22).<\/p>\n<p>The OT teaches that God is a forgiving God (Ex 34:6-7; Neh 9:17; Dn 9:9), yet he is just and punishes sin. Many incidents are also given where God refuses to forgive when the proper conditions are not met, or when certain serious offenses are committed (Dt 29:20; 2 Kgs 24:4; Jer 5:7). Forgiveness is rooted in the character of God, but his forgiveness is never indiscriminate, for people must also be penitent. The OT (cited here in the <span>rsv<\/span>) uses vivid imagery to indicate the magnitude of God’s forgiveness. Sin is cast “into the depths of the sea” (Mi 7:19), removed “as far as the east is from the west” (Ps 103:12), hid behind God’s back (Is 38:17), “remembered no more” (Jer 31:34). The stain and soil of sin is bleached white (Is 1:18). Sin, which burdens like a weight, is forever lifted and remitted.<\/p>\n<p>The dynamic of forgiveness in the OT is thus releasing one from the past. The past acts and deeds of sin are not denied, but there is no longer any bondage. Forgiveness brings freedom.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ForgivenessintheNewTestament\">Forgiveness in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, the concept of the unmerited forgiveness of God is intensified by the fact that God forgave our sins when Christ died for us. Each human is an insolvent debtor (Mt 18:23-35) who has no hope of repayment. Sinners all, we cannot keep the law or save ourselves (Mk 10:26-27). This highlights the NT teaching that it is in the person of Christ himself that there is forgiveness. He alone has the power to forgive sins (2:5-10). It is his death that is redemptive (Mt 26:28; Mk 10:45) and his blood that is the basis of a new covenant (1 Cor 11:25). It is through him that one can enter into the living experience of forgiveness (Heb 9:15, 22). So forgiveness is inseparable from the proclamation of Jesus Christ (Acts 13:38; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 1 Jn 2:12).<\/p>\n\n<p>There are other distinctively NT concepts of forgiveness. The Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charizomai<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to forgive sins,” is distinctively developed by Paul in terms of God’s gracious pardon (2 Cor 2:7; 12:13; Eph 4:32; Col 2:13; 3:13). Sin is considered as a debt, and <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">aphesis<\/span> denotes the discharge of a debt (“putting it away”—see Lk 6:37). Forgiveness is also treated as remission, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">paresis<\/span> (“passing over”). God has not executed the full retribution called for by sin (Acts 14:16; 17:30); instead, he has shown mercy.<\/p>\n<p>Yet the NT speaks of two limitations to forgiveness. One is the unpardonable sin (Mt 12:31-32; Mk 3:28-30; Lk 12:10). In this regard Christ speaks of those who, like the Pharisees, are so warped in their moral judgments that they cannot distinguish between acts of Satan and the good deeds of Christ. There is also “the sin against the Holy Spirit” that is “sin unto death” (1 Jn 5:16). This sin is not specifically defined, but its essence seems to be consistent rejection of the grace of God.<\/p>\n<p>The ethics of forgiveness in the NT insists not only on penitence as a condition for forgiveness (2 Cor 7:10), but also on the need to forgive others (Mt 6:14-15). If in the midst of receiving forgiveness one does not forgive others, it is a clear sign that repentance is not complete. Several times in his parables the Lord insists that the readiness to forgive others is a sign of true repentance (Mt 18:23-35; Lk 6:37). So Christ taught that to forgive is a duty, and no limits can be set on it. It must be granted without reserve, even to 70 times 7 (Mt 18:21-22). Forgiveness is part of the mutual relationship of believers: since all are dependent upon God’s forgiveness, all are required to forgive one another. “As the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive” (Col 3:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Confession; Repentance.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","summary_en":"FORGIVENESS Pardon, involving restoration of broken relationships; ceasing to feel resentment for wrongs and offenses. Primarily, forgiveness is an act of God, releasing sinners from judgment and freeing them from the divine penalty of their sin. Since only God is holy, only God can forgive sin (Mk 2:7; Lk 5:21). Forgiveness is also a human act extended toward one’s neighbor—a manifestation of one’s realization and appropriation of God’s forgiveness. Hence, forgiveness is a uniquely Christian...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14555,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Gospel","title_en":"Gospel","content_ro":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GOSPEL<\/h3>\n<p>Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon <em>godspell<\/em> denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.”<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>• The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<p>• The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelMessageofIsaiah\">The Gospel Message of Isaiah<\/p>\n<p>Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his saving action except in his own nature. Israel’s deliverance is undeserved; she is no more worthy of the divine love now than when she went into captivity. In whatever measure she has paid the just due for her past sins (Is 40:2), she remains a sinful people (42:25; 46:12-13; 48:1). It is only by God’s grace that she is saved (55:1-7). By God’s design, Israel’s salvation depends not upon her own righteousness but upon his (41:10; 45:24; 46:13; 51:5-6). There being no righteousness to reward, the Lord acts to <em>create<\/em> righteousness in Israel (45:8; 61:3, 10-11). Yet as these references indicate, salvation is not accomplished at the expense of justice. The penalty for Israel’s sins is to be paid in full. God’s mercy is not hereby called into question. On the contrary, it is precisely here that his mercy is most poignantly expressed, for the penalty is exacted not from his people but from the Servant appointed to stand in their place (53:4-12). Through the Servant’s work, many shall be justified (53:11). The coming of the Evangelist—the preacher of the good news—is predicted in Isaiah 61. He is called the anointed One (v 1) who proclaims the year of the Lord’s favor (v 2). God will be glorified through his preaching (v 3).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelintheNewTestament\">The Gospel in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In only two places (Gal 3:8; Heb 4:2, 6) does the NT speak of the proclamation of the gospel prior to the Christian era. This is quite remarkable, given (1) the unmistakable presence of the gospel in the OT, (2) the extent of gospel terminology in the NT (in the Greek the noun appears 76 times; and the verb, 54), and (3) the fact that the NT presents Christ as the fulfillment of the OT and draws heavily on the OT to interpret his person and work. Not only is it remarkable; it is very significant. It indicates that the NT usage depends not only upon the <em>character<\/em> of the message (truth about salvation) but also upon <em>historical events.<\/em> Almost without exception, the NT restricts its application of gospel terminology to proclamations made during the time of fulfillment—the age in which the salvation promised in the OT is actually accomplished. The NT is preoccupied, not with promises of salvation, but with news of salvation. According to Mark 1:1-4, the gospel “begins” not in the OT but with John the Baptist, in whose work OT prophecy is fulfilled. In Romans 1:1-5 the gospel is represented as a blessing promised in the OT but not actually given until Jesus comes (see also Acts 13:32-33).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGoodNewsofChristsComing\">The Good News of Christ’s Coming<\/p>\n<p>The promised birth of John the Baptist is good news (Lk 1:19), not only for his parents (vv 7, 24-25) but for all the people: John is sent to prepare them for Messiah’s coming (vv 14-17, 67-79). John’s own preaching is gospel (3:18) for the same reason. The Messiah would be coming to execute judgment, a process that involves both condemnation and salvation (vv 3-17). John’s message is gospel for sinners in that they are warned of impending doom and urged to repent before the ax falls (vv 7-9); it is gospel for the repentant in that they are promised forgiveness (v 3) and membership in Messiah’s community (v 17). The birth of the Savior himself is announced as good news bringing great joy (2:10-11).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelaccordingtoJesus\">The Gospel according to Jesus<\/p>\n<h5>The Coming of the Kingdom of God<\/h5>\n<p>Jesus was authorized by God and anointed by the Spirit to proclaim the gospel (Mk 1:14; Lk 4:18). At the heart of his preaching stands the announcement “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” (Mk 1:15). (For further references to this gospel, see Mt 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; 26:13; Mk 8:35; 10:29; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 4:43; 8:1; 16:16.) The message is good news for several reasons: (1) The kingdom is coming. The God whom Jesus proclaims is sovereign over all he has made. Yet paradoxically his rule is incomplete: his will is not done on earth as it is in heaven; wrong, not right, prevails. But these conditions are not final, according to Jesus. With the coming of the kingdom, God’s rule will be completed; wrong will be judged, righteousness established, and his people blessed. (2) The kingdom is <em>now<\/em> being inaugurated. “The time is fulfilled,” declares Jesus (Mk 1:15a). The time appointed for the fulfillment of the OT promises has arrived. (3) The consummation of the kingdom is therefore no longer a distant prospect; the full realization of God’s rule is “at hand” (Mk 1:15b). (4) God is establishing his rule for a saving purpose. This is implied in Jesus’ call to repentance (Mk 1:15c). It is especially clear in the passages to which we now turn.<\/p>\n<h5>The Salvation of the Poor<\/h5>\n<p>Invited to read the Scripture in the synagogue at Nazareth, Jesus turns to Isaiah 61: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord” (Lk 4:18-19, <span>rsv<\/span>). Having read the prophecy, Jesus announces its fulfillment in his own ministry (v 21). Included among those whom Jesus has come to free are the physically infirm, such as the blind (v 18) and the leprous (v 27) (cf. the references to healing miracles in vv 23, 33-41; the close connection between evangelizing and healing in Mt 4:23; 9:35; 11:5; Lk 7:21-22; 9:6; and the description in Mt 12:22-29; Lk 13:11-16, of the physically afflicted as captives of Satan now liberated by Jesus). Also included are the materially poor—people like the widow helped by Elijah during the famine (Lk 4:25-26). It is the literally poor and hungry whom Jesus pronounces “blessed” in Luke 6:20-21. Yet it is primarily “spiritual” poverty that is in view. Still applying Isaiah 61, Jesus speaks in Matthew 5:3 of the “poor in spirit.” These are people broken and grieved by misery and poverty, oppression and injustice, suffering and death, national apostasy and personal sin—people who in their extremity turn to God and longingly wait for him to bring forth justice, bestow his mercy, and establish his kingdom. It is to just such people that Jesus brings good news (Mt 5:3-10). God sent him to usher in the kingdom, to rescue the lost, to liberate the enslaved, to cure the afflicted, to bind up hearts that are broken, and to forgive the guilty (Mk 2:5, 10, 17; 10:45; Lk 4:18-21; 7:48-49; 15:1-32; 19:10).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gift of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>The coming of the kingdom is not the effect or the reward of human effort but God’s answer to the human predicament—the gift of his favor (Lk 12:32). Correspondingly, the explanation for the salvation of the poor lies nowhere but in God’s own character. As the prodigal himself recognized, he hardly deserved to be his father’s servant, much less his son. Nothing he did, not even his repentance, accounted for the father’s love (15:11-32). In the parable of Matthew 20:1-16, it is owing entirely to the goodness of the employer that the last workers to be hired receive a full day’s wages. The first debtor in the story of Matthew 18:23-35 earned nothing but the right to be sold into slavery; instead, the king canceled his enormous debt. The publican, who had nothing to offer God but a confession of sin and plea for mercy, went home justified (Lk 18:13-14). The same holds true for the more virtuous among the poor, such as the persons described in Matthew 5:7-10. Their virtue is real, not imagined. Yet in keeping God’s commands, they do not put him in their debt; they are simply doing their duty (Lk 17:7-10). Furthermore, even the most merciful need divine mercy (Mt 5:7). For even those most zealous to obey God’s law are unable to fulfill all its requirements (cf. 11:28-30). The first servant in Matthew 18:23-35 owes far more money than someone in such a situation could possibly pay—which serves to magnify the generosity of the king. Grace depends for its exercise upon the inability of its objects (Lk 14:12-14).<\/p>\n<h5>The Call to Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The Israelites are without exception a sinful people, all of them needing the salvation that Jesus brings (Mt 1:21; Lk 1:77). In demonstration of God’s grace, Jesus proclaimed his gospel to the entire nation (Mt 4:23; 9:35; 15:24; Lk 4:43; 9:6; 20:1). From the most respectable to the least, all are summoned to submit to God’s rule, all are invited to come and partake freely of the banquet he has spread (Lk 14:16-24). But the gift of salvation must be received if it is to be experienced (Mk 10:15). And while it is indeed a gift that costs nothing, it is also a priceless treasure for which a wise person will freely sacrifice everything else (Mt 13:44-46), a sacrifice exceeded only by the cost of rejecting the gospel (Mt 11:20-24; Mk 8:34-39; Lk 14:24, 33). “Repent and believe in the gospel,” Jesus commands (Mk 1:15). The self-righteous and the self-sufficient must be jolted out of their false sense of security and humbly recognize their need for God (Lk 6:24-26). Only then will Jesus’ message to the poor be seen as gospel. An announcement of liberation (4:18-19) is good news only to people who are enslaved and know they are. The command applies also to the destitute and the afflicted. Those among them who bemoan their lot must repent of their sins. But something further is needed for the response to be complete: a person cannot believe Jesus’ gospel without a commitment to the <em>Person<\/em> of Christ (Jn 3:16). Even those who are already “poor in spirit,” in the sense defined earlier, are not really “blessed” until they acknowledge the truth of Jesus’ claims (Mt 11:6) and commit themselves to a life of obedience on his terms (7:21-27). This prepares us for the next point.<\/p>\n<h5>Summary<\/h5>\n<p>Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, the theme of his gospel remains the dawning of God’s kingdom (Mt 4:23; 24:14; Lk 4:43; 16:16), a message that is preached almost exclusively to Jews (Mt 10:5-6; 15:24). Yet Jesus also provides glimpses into what the gospel was to become once his work on earth was accomplished: (1) In Mark 8:35 and 10:29 Jesus speaks of individuals who needed to make great sacrifices “for my sake and for the gospel.” While distinguished from each other, the person of Jesus and the gospel are here associated in the closest possible way. The time was approaching when the Proclaimer of the gospel would become the Proclaimed. (2) In Mark 13:10 and Matthew 24:14 (and the textually doubtful Mk 16:15) Jesus foretells the preaching of the gospel of the kingdom to the gentile nations. (3) In Mark 14, having interpreted a woman’s action (v 3) as an anointing of his body beforehand for burial (v 8), Jesus declares, “And truly, I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (v 9, <span>rsv<\/span>; cf. Mt 26:13). This statement strongly implies that both the person of Jesus and the event of his death will figure prominently in the message that is to be proclaimed; otherwise, it is strange that the gospel and this particular act should be so solemnly bound together. Thus, here in the text already is an indication of how crucial Jesus’ death is both for the provision of the salvation announced in his gospel (cf. Mk 14:22-24) and for the launching of the evangelistic mission to the Gentiles (Mt 20:28 is vital for explaining the shift from Mt 15:24 to 28:18-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheGospelafterJesusResurrection\">The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection<\/p>\n<p>After the resurrection of Jesus, the gospel was proclaimed by his eyewitnesses. The contents of this gospel are recorded in the book of Acts and in Paul’s letters. Of the 43 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelizomai<\/span> (“evangelize”) beyond the Gospels, 15 occur in Acts and 21 in Paul’s writings; of the 64 instances of <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">euangelion<\/span> (“gospel”), 2 occur in Acts and no fewer than 60 in Paul.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Christ<\/h5>\n<p>Having risen from the dead, Jesus Christ again evangelizes (Eph 2:16-17), doing so now through his appointed representatives (Rom 15:16-18; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:12-18; Gal 4:13-14; Eph 4:11; 2 Tm 1:9-11). More than that, Christ has become the central theme of the gospel; the Proclaimer is now the Proclaimed. This is repeatedly affirmed in Acts (5:42; 8:4-5, 35; 11:20; 17:18) and in Paul’s writings (Rom 1:1-4; 10:8-17; 15:19-20; 2 Cor 4:4-6; 11:4; Gal 1:16; Eph 3:8; Phil 1:15-18; 2 Tm 2:8). The NT always speaks of <em>the gospel<\/em>—never the gospels—of Christ. A second gospel is as inconceivable and as unnecessary as a second Christ. This is the one gospel that God authorizes (e.g., Rom 1:1-17) and proclaims (e.g., 2 Thes 2:13-14). Galatians 2:7-9 speaks not of two gospels but of two mission fields. Paul (the apostle to the uncircumcised) and Peter (the apostle to the circumcised) are both entrusted with “the gospel of Christ” (Gal 1:7; cf. 1 Cor 15:1-11), the message that God has ordained for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles alike (Rom 1:16). The “different gospel” that Paul denounces in Galatians 1:6-9 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is not another gospel about Jesus but a message about “another Jesus”—not the real one, but one who exists only in the minds and the messages of those who proclaim him. To preach the true Christ is to preach the true gospel, however questionable one’s motives (Phil 1:15-18, 27), and to respond rightly to the gospel is to turn to Christ (Acts 11:20-21; Rom 10:8-17; Gal 2:14-16).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Witness to Saving Events<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel bears witness to every aspect of Christ’s saving work, from his birth (Rom 1:3; 2 Tm 2:8) and public ministry (Mk 1:1; Acts 10:36-38) to his second coming (Col 1:5, 23; cf. 3:1-4; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and the last judgment (Rom 2:16). But it is the death and the resurrection of Christ that are most crucial for the accomplishment of salvation, and that are therefore most prominent in the gospel’s witness. These are the events with which Mark’s proclamation climaxes (chs 15–16), and for which everything else prepares (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 12:6-8); special stress is placed upon Jesus’ death as the means of salvation from sin (10:45; 14:3-9, 22-24). In Paul’s gospel, too, the death and resurrection of Jesus are central (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:1-4), with the cross occupying the very center (1 Cor 1:17–2:5). Had Christ not risen from the dead, Paul argues, the preaching of the cross would be a waste of time (1 Cor 15:14, 17; cf. Rom 6:3-11). However, now that Christ has risen, his death deserves special emphasis as the place where God provides atonement for sins (Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 2 Cor 5:14-21; Eph 1:7). The gospel according to Acts proclaims Jesus’ death (Acts 8:25; 20:24, 28; cf. 10:36-43) and preeminently his resurrection, the event by which he conquered death and was exalted as Lord and coming Judge (10:36-43; 13:32-33; 17:18, 31). According to 1 Peter, the bearers of the gospel (1 Pt 1:12) concentrated, as had the OT prophets, on “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory” (1:11; cf. 1:18-19; 2:21-24; 3:18-22).<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel as a Power for Salvation<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel is much more than a report of past events and an exposition of doctrine. Paul declares in 1 Corinthians 1:17-18 and again in Romans 1:16 that the gospel is “the power of God”—not merely a witness to his power but an <em>expression<\/em> of his power. Thus, it cannot be fettered (2 Tm 2:8-9). “Our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power,” Paul writes in 1 Thessalonians 1:5. His point is not that the gospel was accompanied by mighty works (though this happened; cf. Rom 15:18-19), but that the gospel itself is a mighty work. God makes it so through his Holy Spirit (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:1-5; 1 Thes 1:6). Furthermore, God’s singular purpose in exercising his power is to change people’s lives, to liberate them from sin and death, and to reconcile them to himself—in short, to save them. The gospel has power to effect the salvation it announces and to impart the life it promises (e.g., Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-18; 15:1-2; Eph 1:13; 2 Thes 2:13-14; 2 Tm 1:8-11; 1 Pt 1:23-25). If people are to experience salvation, they must hear and believe the gospel. It is precisely in and through this message that the saving power manifested in the person and work of Christ (especially in his death and resurrection) is conveyed to men and made effective in their lives. Similarly it is in association with the gospel, or as a direct result of the reception of the gospel, that the Holy Spirit is imparted to believers (Acts 10:36-44; 15:7-8; 2 Cor 11:4; Gal 3:1-2). In short, the gospel is the decisive place of encounter between the sinner and God the Savior.<\/p>\n<h5>The Gospel of Grace<\/h5>\n<p>According to Peter’s testimony at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:7-11), an essential part of the gospel—for Gentiles and Jews alike—is salvation “through the grace of the Lord Jesus.” Toward the close of his missionary career, Paul states that his basic concern has been “to testify to the gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24, <span>rsv<\/span>). This statement can be understood only in relation to Paul’s concept of the righteousness of God, particularly as set forth in Romans. Paul is here not merely expounding a divine attribute. Rather, he is dramatizing a divine activity—the manifestation of God’s righteousness now, “in the present time” (Rom 3:26), in the new age inaugurated by the coming of Jesus. The manifestation is twofold. Viewing the two aspects together, and doing so in the light of the gospel declared by Isaiah and by Jesus (both of whom strongly influenced Paul), respectively, will help us to understand why Paul speaks of “the gospel of the grace of God.”<\/p>\n<p>First, the gospel is a <em>witness<\/em> to God’s grace. In offering his Son as a sacrifice for sins (Rom 3:25a), God demonstrates his righteousness (vv 25b-26). That is, in the death of Jesus sins formerly “passed over” (v 25c) become the object of God’s wrath (cf. 1:18) and judgment. Yet in the very place where God deals justly and decisively with sins, he shows his grace to sinners. For the judgment against sin is focused not upon the sinners themselves but upon the One appointed to act on their behalf and to stand in their place (Rom 4:25; 5:6, 11; cf. 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13). On this basis, sinners are freely pardoned (Rom 3:24). “The grace of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 15:11) toward the sinful is also in evidence, for he willingly bears their iniquities and suffers the consequences of their wrongdoing (Gal 2:20; cf. 2 Cor 8:9; Phil 2:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>Second, the gospel is a <em>channel<\/em> of God’s grace. “The righteousness of God is revealed” in the gospel, says Paul (Rom 1:17). By this he means, not that the gospel talks about the righteousness of God (though it does), but that God’s righteousness is actively at work in the gospel. This activity in turn explains how the gospel becomes “the power of God for salvation” (v 16). And just how does God demonstrate his righteousness at this stage? In short, by bestowing it as a free gift on sinful human beings. It remains the righteousness of God, but by God’s grace, it is a righteousness in which humans may share. Furthermore, partaking of God’s righteousness depends on being personally united with Jesus Christ. In Paul’s view the saved person is one who has been acquitted, justified, “declared righteous” by God the judge. The basis for the verdict is not that I in myself am righteous (God justifies the ungodly, Rom 4:5). Nor does God treat me as though I were righteous. According to Paul I am declared righteous because I really <em>am<\/em> righteous—not in myself but in Christ (1 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). This union is established through the revelation—and the free offer—of God’s righteousness in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17).<\/p>\n<h5>Responding to the Gospel<\/h5>\n<p>The gospel calls for a threefold response:<\/p>\n<p>1. <em>Believing.<\/em> The gospel, says Paul, is “the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith” (Rom 1:16). For Paul, faith is the abandonment of all reliance upon “works of law” for justification (3:28) and utter dependence upon the grace of God as demonstrated in the work of Christ, especially his death (v 25). Accordingly, the “different gospel” of Galatians 1:6 and 2 Corinthians 11:4 is spurious, for it preaches salvation by personal merit rather than (or together with) the work of Christ (cf. Gal 2:16). Ultimately faith rests upon God (Rom 4:24; 1 Thes 1:8-9) and upon Christ (Rom 3:22, 26; Gal 2:16, 20). Yet it is imperative that one believe the gospel also (Acts 8:12; 11:20-21; 15:7; Rom 1:16; 10:8-17; 1 Cor 1:17-24; Phil 1:27; Heb 4:2), for it is just by this means that God’s salvation is made known and mediated. Moreover, believing the gospel entails repentance (Acts 14:15; 20:21, 24; 1 Thes 1:5-10) and obedience (Rom 1:5; 15:16-18; Heb 4:6). Those who refuse to obey the gospel are imperiling their lives (2 Thes 1:5-10; 1 Pt 4:17).<\/p>\n<p>2. <em>Growing.<\/em> The Gospel is more than a message to be received—it is also a place in which to stand (1 Cor 15:1-2). It is sustainer of life as well as giver of life. One grows as a Christian not by turning from the gospel to other things (to turn away from the gospel is to abandon God and Christ, Gal 1:6), but by going ever more deeply into the gospel. In Romans 1:15 Paul expresses his eagerness to proclaim the gospel to the Christians in Rome. In the following chapters, anticipating his visit, he offers one of his most profound expositions of the gospel—one whose truth has never been fathomed and whose power has never been exhausted.<\/p>\n<p>3. <em>Hoping.<\/em> “The hope of the gospel” (Col 1:23) includes not only the return of Christ and the glory of heaven (Col 1:5; 3:1-4; 2 Thes 2:14-16) but the final judgment as well. For those who embrace the gospel, the last judgment holds no terrors, because the Judge is the very one who rescues them from the wrath to come (1 Thes 1:10). Those who are united to him need not dread condemnation now or at the end (Rom 8:1). Instead, the last judgment will mark their final vindication (1 Cor 4:5; Gal 5:5). Accordingly, this theme is not just a corollary but an integral part of the Good News (Rom 2:16). Those who have died since believing the gospel (1 Pt 4:6) may seem to have suffered a fate common to all people, or even the condemnation reserved for the lawless; in fact, their response to the gospel assures them of approval by the coming Lord (4:5-6; 5:4) and of a share in the imperishable inheritance of heaven (1:4).<\/p>","summary_ro":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","summary_en":"GOSPEL Word derived from the Anglo-Saxon godspell denoting “glad tidings” or “good news.” Preview • The Gospel Message of Isaiah • The Gospel in the New Testament • The Good News of Christ’s Coming • The Gospel according to Jesus • The Gospel after Jesus’ Resurrection The Gospel Message of Isaiah Of all the passages cited, those of Isaiah provide the most important background for the gospel in the NT. According to Isaiah’s gospel, it is God alone who saves, and there is no explanation for his...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14733,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Grace","title_en":"Grace","content_ro":"<h3>GRACE<\/h3>\n<p>The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people.<\/p>\n<p>Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheOldTestament\">Grace in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Early in the narrative of the OT, God reveals himself as a “God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). As a result, it becomes possible for undeserving humans to approach him with the prayer, “If now I have found favor [or grace] in thy sight, O Lord, . . .” (Ex 34:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Through divine initiative, human alienation from God is turned by him into a state of unmerited acceptance that opens the way for reconciliation and redemptive usefulness.<\/p>\n<p>Divine grace was already operative in the Garden of Eden when God responded to the debacle of the fall with the promise of redemption (Gn 3:15) and solicitous care rather than with abandonment or retributive annihilation. The call to Abraham was an extension of grace, not only to him as an individual, but through him as a means of universal outreach. As an inseparable part of God’s promise of individual blessing to Abraham and of a national blessing to his descendants, the indication was given that the individual and the national blessings would be instrumental in bringing about a universal blessing to “all the families of the earth” (Gn 12:2-3). Consequently, both the election of Abraham and the promise of universal blessing find expression in a God-given covenant, the object of which is to extend God’s grace to the whole human race. In a solemn confirmation of the promise to Abraham, God affirmed, “My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. . . . And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant” (Gn 17:4, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This promise was to be understood as finding fulfillment on the basis of grace, not of race, so that it would become applicable to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to Jewish believers, his racial descendants, but also to his spiritual descendants, believers from all nations who profess a faith like Abraham’s (Rom 4:16). Thus, from the perspective of divine grace, the election of Abraham and of national Israel was not an end in itself. It was God’s plan for extending his redemptive designs to all believers, from all nations. In extending his grace to Abraham, God was establishing the beginnings of the church, the community of grace.<\/p>\n<p>The divine particularism evidenced in the election of Abraham and in his becoming the recipient of God’s grace provides a model for the selection of all the individuals used by God in the history of redemption. Beyond the benefits of grace accorded to individuals such as Abraham, David, the prophets, and later the apostles, by virtue of their call, loomed the potential of their contributions to the fulfillment of the covenant of God on behalf of the community of those who share the faith of Abraham—the church. In the gracious dealings of God with Israel, with its patriarchs and its leaders, God was laying the basis for his outreach of grace to the church universal. God’s gracious interventions in the old covenant were intended to manifest the ultimacy of the church in his redemptive purposes. In the exercise of their ministries, the prophets of the old covenant knew that they were serving not themselves but the church (1 Pt 1:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>As a transitional, mediatory expression of divine grace, the institutions of the old covenant possessed only a temporary validity that has been superseded by the ultimate manifestations of God’s grace in the new covenant (Heb 8:6-7). Consequently, the old covenant was to become obsolete and replaced by a new covenant that would display the full manifestation of God’s grace. The proverbial tension between law and grace becomes intelligible in this perspective. Like the election of racial Israel, the law (as one of the most visible institutions of the old covenant) was a temporary measure of divine grace accorded to anticipate and prepare the covenant of justification through grace by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal 3:23-29; Heb 10:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheNewTestament\">Grace in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of grace defined as God’s active involvement on behalf of his people receives a sharper focus in the NT. Divine grace becomes embodied in the person of Jesus Christ, who demonstrates visibly the dynamic nature of God’s grace and fulfills in his ministry of redemption the old covenant promises relative to God’s gracious dealings with humanity (Jn 1:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to forgive sinners and to gather them in the church, the new covenant community. During his ministry, Jesus repeatedly pronounced the words of forgiveness on a great number of sinners and ministered God’s benevolent succor to a variety of desperate human needs. Through teachings such as the father’s forgiveness of the prodigal son and the search for the lost sheep, Jesus made it clear that he had come to seek and save those who were lost. But ultimately it was his redemptive death on the cross that opened wide the gate of salvation for repentant sinners to find access to God’s forgiving and restorative grace. This simple truth is formulated in the doctrine of justification by faith through grace (Rom 3:23; Ti 3:7). According to this teaching, God’s gracious provision of the substitutionary death of Christ enables him to pronounce a verdict of “just” or “not guilty” on repentant sinners and to include them in his eternal purposes. As a result, they enter into the realm of God’s gracious activity, which enables them to implement the process of individual sanctification in cooperation with the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ also makes it possible for God to bestow on believers undeserved benefits that enrich their lives and unite them together in the church, the body of Christ. Their acceptance on the basis of grace endows them with a new status as children of God, members of the household of God, so that they relate to him as to their heavenly Father (Gal 4:4-6). Consequently, they become members of a community where race, class, and sex distinctions are irrelevant, since they all became equal inheritors of God’s age-long promise to Abraham of universal blessing (3:28-29). In order to enrich their individual lives and to assure the usefulness of their participation in the life of the new community, the Holy Spirit graciously energizes believers with a variety of gifts for the performance of ministries designed to benefit the church (Rom 12:6-8). Foremost among those ministries is that of apostle, itself closely linked to God’s gracious provision (1:5; 15:15-16) since it combines with the ministry of the prophets of old to provide the foundational structure of the church (Eph 2:20). Because the riches of divine grace are freely lavished upon believers in their community life upon earth (1:7-8), the church translated into eternity will demonstrate, by its very existence, the immeasurable riches of God’s grace in Jesus Christ (2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to cause believers to reflect his grace in their character and relationships. The irreducible condition for receiving God’s grace is humility (Jas 4:6; 1 Pt 5:5). Such humility in relation to God enables believers to practice humility in regard to other people. From a position of grace, they can set aside selfishness and conceit in order to treat others with deference (Phil 2:3-4) in an attitude of mutual servanthood (Eph 5:21), and in a spirit of mutual forgiveness (Mt 18:23-35) so that even their communication can exhibit divine grace (Col 4:6). Since the grace of Jesus Christ constitutes the existential context of the lives and relationships of believers, they are exhorted not to pervert the grace of God into ungodly practice (Jude 1:4) but instead to grow in the grace of the Lord (2 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>The essential meaning of grace in the Bible refers to God’s disposition to exercise goodwill toward his creatures. This favorable disposition of God finds its supreme expression in Jesus Christ. By its very definition, this grace is rendered fully accessible to all humans with no other precondition than a repentant desire to receive it (Ti 2:11-12). As a result, the human condition of alienation from God and from his purposes becomes replaced with access to the otherwise unapproachable majesty of God represented by a throne, so that his grace may become available to meet human need (Heb 4:16). The tragic alternative to receiving God’s grace is to remain in hopeless alienation or to pursue sterile attempts to merit God’s favor through human efforts doomed to futility (Rom 1:21). God’s unconditional acceptance of sinners may be conditioned only by their rejection of his acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Because Christ represents the fulfillment, the embodiment, and the dispenser of divine grace, the early Christians freely referred to God’s grace as “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This grace was conceived as being so basic and so pervasive to their individual lives and to the existence of their communities of faith that they naturally coupled the traditional greeting of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> (“peace”) with a reference to the grace of Jesus Christ. This is the reason for the ubiquitous repetition of numerous variations on the basic greeting formula found in almost every book of the NT, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all” (2 Thes 3:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Love; Mercy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GRACE<\/h3>\n<p>The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people.<\/p>\n<p>Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheOldTestament\">Grace in the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>Early in the narrative of the OT, God reveals himself as a “God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ex 34:6, <span>rsv<\/span>). As a result, it becomes possible for undeserving humans to approach him with the prayer, “If now I have found favor [or grace] in thy sight, O Lord, . . .” (Ex 34:9, <span>rsv<\/span>). Through divine initiative, human alienation from God is turned by him into a state of unmerited acceptance that opens the way for reconciliation and redemptive usefulness.<\/p>\n<p>Divine grace was already operative in the Garden of Eden when God responded to the debacle of the fall with the promise of redemption (Gn 3:15) and solicitous care rather than with abandonment or retributive annihilation. The call to Abraham was an extension of grace, not only to him as an individual, but through him as a means of universal outreach. As an inseparable part of God’s promise of individual blessing to Abraham and of a national blessing to his descendants, the indication was given that the individual and the national blessings would be instrumental in bringing about a universal blessing to “all the families of the earth” (Gn 12:2-3). Consequently, both the election of Abraham and the promise of universal blessing find expression in a God-given covenant, the object of which is to extend God’s grace to the whole human race. In a solemn confirmation of the promise to Abraham, God affirmed, “My covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. . . . And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant” (Gn 17:4, 7, <span>rsv<\/span>). This promise was to be understood as finding fulfillment on the basis of grace, not of race, so that it would become applicable to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to Jewish believers, his racial descendants, but also to his spiritual descendants, believers from all nations who profess a faith like Abraham’s (Rom 4:16). Thus, from the perspective of divine grace, the election of Abraham and of national Israel was not an end in itself. It was God’s plan for extending his redemptive designs to all believers, from all nations. In extending his grace to Abraham, God was establishing the beginnings of the church, the community of grace.<\/p>\n<p>The divine particularism evidenced in the election of Abraham and in his becoming the recipient of God’s grace provides a model for the selection of all the individuals used by God in the history of redemption. Beyond the benefits of grace accorded to individuals such as Abraham, David, the prophets, and later the apostles, by virtue of their call, loomed the potential of their contributions to the fulfillment of the covenant of God on behalf of the community of those who share the faith of Abraham—the church. In the gracious dealings of God with Israel, with its patriarchs and its leaders, God was laying the basis for his outreach of grace to the church universal. God’s gracious interventions in the old covenant were intended to manifest the ultimacy of the church in his redemptive purposes. In the exercise of their ministries, the prophets of the old covenant knew that they were serving not themselves but the church (1 Pt 1:10-12).<\/p>\n<p>As a transitional, mediatory expression of divine grace, the institutions of the old covenant possessed only a temporary validity that has been superseded by the ultimate manifestations of God’s grace in the new covenant (Heb 8:6-7). Consequently, the old covenant was to become obsolete and replaced by a new covenant that would display the full manifestation of God’s grace. The proverbial tension between law and grace becomes intelligible in this perspective. Like the election of racial Israel, the law (as one of the most visible institutions of the old covenant) was a temporary measure of divine grace accorded to anticipate and prepare the covenant of justification through grace by faith in Jesus Christ (Gal 3:23-29; Heb 10:1).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GraceintheNewTestament\">Grace in the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The concept of grace defined as God’s active involvement on behalf of his people receives a sharper focus in the NT. Divine grace becomes embodied in the person of Jesus Christ, who demonstrates visibly the dynamic nature of God’s grace and fulfills in his ministry of redemption the old covenant promises relative to God’s gracious dealings with humanity (Jn 1:14, 17).<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to forgive sinners and to gather them in the church, the new covenant community. During his ministry, Jesus repeatedly pronounced the words of forgiveness on a great number of sinners and ministered God’s benevolent succor to a variety of desperate human needs. Through teachings such as the father’s forgiveness of the prodigal son and the search for the lost sheep, Jesus made it clear that he had come to seek and save those who were lost. But ultimately it was his redemptive death on the cross that opened wide the gate of salvation for repentant sinners to find access to God’s forgiving and restorative grace. This simple truth is formulated in the doctrine of justification by faith through grace (Rom 3:23; Ti 3:7). According to this teaching, God’s gracious provision of the substitutionary death of Christ enables him to pronounce a verdict of “just” or “not guilty” on repentant sinners and to include them in his eternal purposes. As a result, they enter into the realm of God’s gracious activity, which enables them to implement the process of individual sanctification in cooperation with the Holy Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ also makes it possible for God to bestow on believers undeserved benefits that enrich their lives and unite them together in the church, the body of Christ. Their acceptance on the basis of grace endows them with a new status as children of God, members of the household of God, so that they relate to him as to their heavenly Father (Gal 4:4-6). Consequently, they become members of a community where race, class, and sex distinctions are irrelevant, since they all became equal inheritors of God’s age-long promise to Abraham of universal blessing (3:28-29). In order to enrich their individual lives and to assure the usefulness of their participation in the life of the new community, the Holy Spirit graciously energizes believers with a variety of gifts for the performance of ministries designed to benefit the church (Rom 12:6-8). Foremost among those ministries is that of apostle, itself closely linked to God’s gracious provision (1:5; 15:15-16) since it combines with the ministry of the prophets of old to provide the foundational structure of the church (Eph 2:20). Because the riches of divine grace are freely lavished upon believers in their community life upon earth (1:7-8), the church translated into eternity will demonstrate, by its very existence, the immeasurable riches of God’s grace in Jesus Christ (2:6).<\/p>\n<p>Finally, God’s grace manifested in Jesus Christ makes it possible for God to cause believers to reflect his grace in their character and relationships. The irreducible condition for receiving God’s grace is humility (Jas 4:6; 1 Pt 5:5). Such humility in relation to God enables believers to practice humility in regard to other people. From a position of grace, they can set aside selfishness and conceit in order to treat others with deference (Phil 2:3-4) in an attitude of mutual servanthood (Eph 5:21), and in a spirit of mutual forgiveness (Mt 18:23-35) so that even their communication can exhibit divine grace (Col 4:6). Since the grace of Jesus Christ constitutes the existential context of the lives and relationships of believers, they are exhorted not to pervert the grace of God into ungodly practice (Jude 1:4) but instead to grow in the grace of the Lord (2 Pt 3:18).<\/p>\n<p>The essential meaning of grace in the Bible refers to God’s disposition to exercise goodwill toward his creatures. This favorable disposition of God finds its supreme expression in Jesus Christ. By its very definition, this grace is rendered fully accessible to all humans with no other precondition than a repentant desire to receive it (Ti 2:11-12). As a result, the human condition of alienation from God and from his purposes becomes replaced with access to the otherwise unapproachable majesty of God represented by a throne, so that his grace may become available to meet human need (Heb 4:16). The tragic alternative to receiving God’s grace is to remain in hopeless alienation or to pursue sterile attempts to merit God’s favor through human efforts doomed to futility (Rom 1:21). God’s unconditional acceptance of sinners may be conditioned only by their rejection of his acceptance.<\/p>\n<p>Because Christ represents the fulfillment, the embodiment, and the dispenser of divine grace, the early Christians freely referred to God’s grace as “the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” This grace was conceived as being so basic and so pervasive to their individual lives and to the existence of their communities of faith that they naturally coupled the traditional greeting of <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">shalom<\/span> (“peace”) with a reference to the grace of Jesus Christ. This is the reason for the ubiquitous repetition of numerous variations on the basic greeting formula found in almost every book of the NT, “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all” (2 Thes 3:18).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Love; Mercy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GRACE The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people. Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT. Grace in t...","summary_en":"GRACE The gift of God as expressed in his actions of extending mercy, loving-kindness, and salvation to people. Grace is the dimension of divine activity that enables God to confront human indifference and rebellion with an inexhaustible capacity to forgive and to bless. God is gracious in action. The doctrine of divine grace underlies the thought of both the OT and NT. However, the OT merely anticipates and prepares for the full expression of grace that becomes manifest in the NT. Grace in t...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":28832,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Parable","title_en":"Parable","content_ro":"<h3>Parable<\/h3>\n<p>A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>• The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>• The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. While the parable form is not unique to Jesus, he was certainly a master at using parables as a way of teaching. The parables are not merely illustrations for Jesus’ preaching; they <em>are<\/em> the preaching, at least to a great extent. Nor are they simple stories; they have been truly described as both “works of art” and “weapons of warfare.” How one interprets the parables is not as easy a task as one might think. The way one understands the nature of a parable and the essence of Jesus’ message obviously will determine the method and content of interpretation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryofInterpretation\">History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>A great deal of insight can be obtained by following the course of treatment the parables have received over the centuries. Not surprisingly, they have been subjected to radically different approaches. But the questions that underlie all interpretations are these: (1) How much of the parable is really significant—all the details or only one point? (2) What is the meaning of the parable in the teaching of Jesus? (3) Of what relevance is the parable to the interpreter?<\/p>\n<h5>The Allegorizing Approach<\/h5>\n<p>From the second century even to the present, many people have allegorized the parables. In effect, they have said that every detail in the account is significant and that the meaning and relevance of a parable are to be found in the way it portrays Christian theology. This method, often identified as the Alexandrian school of interpretation, is best illustrated by a classic example that comes from Augustine (<span>AD<\/span> 354–430), the scholar who, despite his allegorizing, was a great theologian. His interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan views Christ as the good Samaritan, the oil as the comfort of good hope, the animal as the flesh of the Incarnation, the inn as the church, and the innkeeper as the apostle Paul (to say nothing of the other details). Obviously, this interpretation has nothing in common with Jesus’ intention but rather reads into the story preconceived ideas of the interpreter. Such an approach can sound good theologically, but it prohibits the hearing of the Word of God. Medieval interpreters went even further than the allegorizing approach by finding multiple meanings in the text. Usually four were listed: (1) the literal meaning; (2) an allegorical meaning relating to Christian theology; (3) a moral meaning giving direction for daily life; (4) a heavenly meaning indicating something about future life.<\/p>\n<p>Not all of the church was dominated by such allegorizing interpretations. The school of Antioch was known for its commonsense approach to hearing the text. However, its influence was limited when compared to the Alexandrian school and, apart from notable exceptions, most of the church’s efforts at understanding the parables over the centuries have involved allegorizing.<\/p>\n<h5>The Approach of Adolph Julicher (1867–1938)<\/h5>\n<p>Julicher was a German scholar who published two volumes on the parables toward the end of the 19th century. His major contribution was the wholesale rejection of allegorizing as a means of interpreting the parables. In his reaction against allegorizing, Julicher went to the opposite extreme to say that a parable of Jesus has only one point of contact between the story and the fact being portrayed. He believed that this one point alone is important in interpretation and that it will usually be a general religious statement. Julicher went so far as to say that not only was allegorizing wrong but that Jesus did not use allegories, since they tend to hide rather than reveal. He said that any allegory appearing in the NT comes from the writers of the Gospels rather than Jesus. Julicher was correct to reject allegorizing (i.e., making an allegory of what was not intended to be allegory), but the rejection of allegory itself as a legitimate means of communication for Jesus is unfounded.<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Approach<\/h5>\n<p>Twentieth-century study of the parables, particularly the work of C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) and Joachim Jeremias, has rightly emphasized the historical context in which the parables were originally told. Focus is placed on cultural factors that help in understanding the details of the parables and on the context of Jesus’ original preaching about the kingdom of God. Usually this approach has assumed that the first-century church changed the original thrust of some of the parables to meet her own needs, and consequently various procedures have been proposed to recover the original intent. It is true that the parables have been shaped, edited, and collected in units by the Gospel writers (note, e.g., Matthew’s collection of eight parables in Mt 13:1-52). Also, the aim of an interpreter should be to hear the parables as they were originally intended by Jesus and as his original audience heard them. The attempt to go behind the Gospel accounts, however, is a delicate task, and some of the procedures proposed for doing so need to be questioned. Notice must be taken of the way each of the Gospel writers has used his material, but the extent to which one can go behind the Gospels is limited.<\/p>\n<h5>Modern Trends in Parable Research<\/h5>\n<p>In the past few decades a number of attempts to interpret the parables have suggested new avenues of approach. Basically these new approaches have been somewhat dissatisfied with (although appreciative of) both Julicher and the historical approach in that both limit the impact of the parables on today’s reader. Julicher reduced Jesus’ teaching to pious moralisms, and the historical approach tended to focus on 2,000 years ago while ignoring both the artistic and psychological features of the parables. Consequently, numerous attempts have been made to convey the same impact the parables had for the original hearers to today’s hearers. Increasingly, less focus is placed on the historical meaning of the parables and more emphasis is placed on their artistic, existential, and poetic effect. Jesus’ parables are regarded as works of art that can be regarded as open-ended as far as meaning is concerned. A parable, then, would have an original meaning and the potential for a series of further possible meanings. While the original meaning would provide some control for reinterpretation, these approaches are not bound by the author’s intention.<\/p>\n<p>A great deal can be learned from modern approaches, especially from their concern to make sure that the parables speak to our day with their original vitality. However, there is also the danger of abusing the parables in a way similar to earlier mistreatments. Those allegorizing the parables in the history of the church were not bound by the meaning of Jesus and found their own meaning. Modern interpreters, too, can find their own meaning, and even though the explanations may sound convincing (as no doubt Augustine’s did to his hearers), they will not be a communication of the Word of God. If God and his ways are revealed by Jesus, then we err if we do not hear his parables as they were intended in their original context. There is indeed a dynamic interaction between the text and the interpreter, but the interpreter is brought to a moment of truth most effectively when the Spirit confronts him or her with the parable as Jesus intended it for his hearers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofParable\">The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>The usual definition of a parable as “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning” will not suffice for understanding Jesus’ parables. Nor are parables merely comparisons or illustrations of what Jesus wanted to say. The situation is much more complex with regard to the biblical meaning of the word “parable.” In fact, one must distinguish between three uses of the word “parable” in biblical studies.<\/p>\n<p>First, one should be aware that the Greek word for parable and its Hebrew counterpart are both broad terms and can be used for anything from a proverb to a full-blown allegory, including a riddle, a dark saying, an illustration, a contrast, or a story. For example, the Greek word for parable is used in Luke 4:23 with reference to the saying “physician, heal yourself” and most translations render it as “proverb.” In Mark 3:23 “parables” is used with reference to the riddles Jesus asks the scribes, such as “How can Satan cast out Satan?” Similarly, Mark 13:28 uses “parable” of a simple illustration. In Luke 18:2-5 the unjust judge is <em>contrasted<\/em> with God, who brings justice quickly. If one compares the Hebrew OT and the Septuagint (an ancient Greek translation of the OT), the word for parable is used most frequently with reference to a proverb or dark saying. The broad meaning of “parable,” then, can refer to any of these methods used to stimulate thought.<\/p>\n<p>Second, “parable” can be used of any story with two levels of meaning (literal and figurative) that functions as religious and ethical speech.<\/p>\n<p>Third, “parable” can be used technically in modern studies to distinguish it from other types of stories, such as similitudes, exemplary stories, and allegories. In this case a parable is a fictitious story that narrates a particular event and is usually told in the past tense (e.g., the parable of the lost son). A similitude, however, is a comparison that relates a typical or recurring event in real life and is usually told in the present tense (e.g., Mt 13:31-32). An exemplary story is not a comparison at all; rather, it presents character traits as either positive or negative examples to be imitated or avoided. Usually four exemplary stories are identified: the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35), the rich fool (12:16-20), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Allegory is the most difficult to define and has caused considerable debate. Usually allegory is defined as “a series of related metaphors.” A metaphor is an implied comparison that does not use “like” or “as.” This definition is used broadly, but it is not entirely satisfactory for two reasons: (1) It does not indicate whether obscurity is an essential element in allegory. Some view allegory as needing to be decoded and as being understandable only to a select few. If, however, the allegory uses customary metaphors that all could understand, it would not be obscure. (2) It does not specify how much of the story is important as related metaphors. If there were only two or three related metaphors, would the story be an allegory? At the other extreme, do minor details in the story (such as the three levels of harvest in the parable of the sower) have significance? An example of an allegory would be the parable of the sower.<\/p>\n<p>This raises the problem of the difference between a parable and an allegory—a frequently debated issue. On definitions one and two above, allegory is included in parable. But on definition three, a distinction is made between them because a parable is not a series of related metaphors. The details of the story of the lost son (the swine, the far country, etc.) do not stand for something else as they would if they were in an allegory but rather convey in dramatic terms the depths to which the son had sunk. However, a parable is <em>not<\/em> thereby limited to one point of comparison between the story and the fact being portrayed. There may be several items that need to be mentioned from a particular parable. The parable of the lost son emphasizes the rejoicing that takes place at repentance (note the repetition of this theme in Lk 15:24, 32), but the receptivity of the father obviously parallels the grace of God and the younger and elder sons reflect sinners and religious authorities, respectively. The distinction between parable and allegory is vague at best and will vary, depending on what definitions are assigned the terms. One should note that what can be said about parable usually can also be said about allegory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposeofParables\">The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of parables and a description of their characteristics will assist understanding. The parables focus on God and his kingdom and in doing so reveal what kind of God he is, by what principles he works, and what he expects of humanity. Because of the focus on the kingdom, some of the parables reveal many aspects of Jesus’ mission as well (note the parable of the wicked tenants in Mt 21:33-41).<\/p>\n<p>The following characteristics of parables should be observed: (1) Parables are usually concise and symmetrical. Items are presented in twos or threes with an economy of words. Unnecessary people, motives, and details are usually omitted. (2) The features in the story are taken from everyday life, and the metaphors used are frequently common enough that they set up a context for understanding. For example, the discussion of an owner and his vineyard would naturally make hearers think of God and his people because of the OT use of those images. (3) Even though the parables speak in terms of everyday life, often they contain elements of surprise or hyperbole (an exaggeration used as a figure of speech). The parable of the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35) introduces a Samaritan in the story where one would probably expect a layperson. The parable of the unforgiving servant (Mt 18:23-34) puts the debt of the first servant at $10 million, an unbelievable sum in that day. (4) Parables require their hearers to pass judgment on the events of the story and, having done so, to realize that they must make a similar judgment in their own lives. The classic example is the parable of Nathan to David (2 Sm 12:1-7), where David judges the man in the story as worthy of death and then is told that he is the man. Because they force one to decide, to come to a moment of truth, the parables force their hearers to live in the present without resting on the laurels of the past or waiting for the future. The parables are the result of a mind that sees truth in concrete pictures rather than abstractions, and they teach that truth in such a compelling manner that the hearer cannot escape it.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReasonJesusTaughtinParables\">The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p>There is little doubt that Jesus taught in parables because they are both interesting and compelling and therefore are one of the most effective means of communicating. When one reads Mark 4:10-12, however, it seems that Jesus taught in parables in order to <em>keep<\/em> people from understanding so that they would not turn and be forgiven. It seems as well that there is a mystery that is given to the <em>in<\/em> group and that the <em>out<\/em> group is prohibited from learning. Herein is the meaning of the term “mystery.” Rather than being that which is not known or understood, as the word is used today, the biblical use of this word is usually for that which has been revealed by God and would not have been known had God not revealed it. The content of the mystery is not explained here, but from Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom elsewhere, it probably refers to the fact that the kingdom is present in Jesus’ own words and actions.<\/p>\n<p>The other factor crucial for understanding this passage is that the word “parable” in biblical usage has a broad meaning referring to any striking speech or dark saying intended to stimulate thought. Jesus did not spoon-feed his hearers; rather, he taught in such a way as to bring about a response, and where there was a response, he gave additional teaching. Consequently, it is not merely that parables are interesting, poetic, and arresting (as important as those characteristics are). In addition, parables stimulate thought and bring about response—if hardness of heart does not prevent it. It is as if Jesus were saying, “If you cannot hear what I am saying, I will reveal my thought in parables.” Where there is response to this initial teaching, additional information is given.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Parable<\/h3>\n<p>A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Introduction<\/p>\n<p>• History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>• The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>• The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>• The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Introduction\">Introduction<\/p>\n<p>An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. While the parable form is not unique to Jesus, he was certainly a master at using parables as a way of teaching. The parables are not merely illustrations for Jesus’ preaching; they <em>are<\/em> the preaching, at least to a great extent. Nor are they simple stories; they have been truly described as both “works of art” and “weapons of warfare.” How one interprets the parables is not as easy a task as one might think. The way one understands the nature of a parable and the essence of Jesus’ message obviously will determine the method and content of interpretation.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoryofInterpretation\">History of Interpretation<\/p>\n<p>A great deal of insight can be obtained by following the course of treatment the parables have received over the centuries. Not surprisingly, they have been subjected to radically different approaches. But the questions that underlie all interpretations are these: (1) How much of the parable is really significant—all the details or only one point? (2) What is the meaning of the parable in the teaching of Jesus? (3) Of what relevance is the parable to the interpreter?<\/p>\n<h5>The Allegorizing Approach<\/h5>\n<p>From the second century even to the present, many people have allegorized the parables. In effect, they have said that every detail in the account is significant and that the meaning and relevance of a parable are to be found in the way it portrays Christian theology. This method, often identified as the Alexandrian school of interpretation, is best illustrated by a classic example that comes from Augustine (<span>AD<\/span> 354–430), the scholar who, despite his allegorizing, was a great theologian. His interpretation of the parable of the good Samaritan views Christ as the good Samaritan, the oil as the comfort of good hope, the animal as the flesh of the Incarnation, the inn as the church, and the innkeeper as the apostle Paul (to say nothing of the other details). Obviously, this interpretation has nothing in common with Jesus’ intention but rather reads into the story preconceived ideas of the interpreter. Such an approach can sound good theologically, but it prohibits the hearing of the Word of God. Medieval interpreters went even further than the allegorizing approach by finding multiple meanings in the text. Usually four were listed: (1) the literal meaning; (2) an allegorical meaning relating to Christian theology; (3) a moral meaning giving direction for daily life; (4) a heavenly meaning indicating something about future life.<\/p>\n<p>Not all of the church was dominated by such allegorizing interpretations. The school of Antioch was known for its commonsense approach to hearing the text. However, its influence was limited when compared to the Alexandrian school and, apart from notable exceptions, most of the church’s efforts at understanding the parables over the centuries have involved allegorizing.<\/p>\n<h5>The Approach of Adolph Julicher (1867–1938)<\/h5>\n<p>Julicher was a German scholar who published two volumes on the parables toward the end of the 19th century. His major contribution was the wholesale rejection of allegorizing as a means of interpreting the parables. In his reaction against allegorizing, Julicher went to the opposite extreme to say that a parable of Jesus has only one point of contact between the story and the fact being portrayed. He believed that this one point alone is important in interpretation and that it will usually be a general religious statement. Julicher went so far as to say that not only was allegorizing wrong but that Jesus did not use allegories, since they tend to hide rather than reveal. He said that any allegory appearing in the NT comes from the writers of the Gospels rather than Jesus. Julicher was correct to reject allegorizing (i.e., making an allegory of what was not intended to be allegory), but the rejection of allegory itself as a legitimate means of communication for Jesus is unfounded.<\/p>\n<h5>The Historical Approach<\/h5>\n<p>Twentieth-century study of the parables, particularly the work of C. H. Dodd (1884–1973) and Joachim Jeremias, has rightly emphasized the historical context in which the parables were originally told. Focus is placed on cultural factors that help in understanding the details of the parables and on the context of Jesus’ original preaching about the kingdom of God. Usually this approach has assumed that the first-century church changed the original thrust of some of the parables to meet her own needs, and consequently various procedures have been proposed to recover the original intent. It is true that the parables have been shaped, edited, and collected in units by the Gospel writers (note, e.g., Matthew’s collection of eight parables in Mt 13:1-52). Also, the aim of an interpreter should be to hear the parables as they were originally intended by Jesus and as his original audience heard them. The attempt to go behind the Gospel accounts, however, is a delicate task, and some of the procedures proposed for doing so need to be questioned. Notice must be taken of the way each of the Gospel writers has used his material, but the extent to which one can go behind the Gospels is limited.<\/p>\n<h5>Modern Trends in Parable Research<\/h5>\n<p>In the past few decades a number of attempts to interpret the parables have suggested new avenues of approach. Basically these new approaches have been somewhat dissatisfied with (although appreciative of) both Julicher and the historical approach in that both limit the impact of the parables on today’s reader. Julicher reduced Jesus’ teaching to pious moralisms, and the historical approach tended to focus on 2,000 years ago while ignoring both the artistic and psychological features of the parables. Consequently, numerous attempts have been made to convey the same impact the parables had for the original hearers to today’s hearers. Increasingly, less focus is placed on the historical meaning of the parables and more emphasis is placed on their artistic, existential, and poetic effect. Jesus’ parables are regarded as works of art that can be regarded as open-ended as far as meaning is concerned. A parable, then, would have an original meaning and the potential for a series of further possible meanings. While the original meaning would provide some control for reinterpretation, these approaches are not bound by the author’s intention.<\/p>\n<p>A great deal can be learned from modern approaches, especially from their concern to make sure that the parables speak to our day with their original vitality. However, there is also the danger of abusing the parables in a way similar to earlier mistreatments. Those allegorizing the parables in the history of the church were not bound by the meaning of Jesus and found their own meaning. Modern interpreters, too, can find their own meaning, and even though the explanations may sound convincing (as no doubt Augustine’s did to his hearers), they will not be a communication of the Word of God. If God and his ways are revealed by Jesus, then we err if we do not hear his parables as they were intended in their original context. There is indeed a dynamic interaction between the text and the interpreter, but the interpreter is brought to a moment of truth most effectively when the Spirit confronts him or her with the parable as Jesus intended it for his hearers.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheMeaningofParable\">The Meaning of “Parable”<\/p>\n<p>The usual definition of a parable as “an earthly story with a heavenly meaning” will not suffice for understanding Jesus’ parables. Nor are parables merely comparisons or illustrations of what Jesus wanted to say. The situation is much more complex with regard to the biblical meaning of the word “parable.” In fact, one must distinguish between three uses of the word “parable” in biblical studies.<\/p>\n<p>First, one should be aware that the Greek word for parable and its Hebrew counterpart are both broad terms and can be used for anything from a proverb to a full-blown allegory, including a riddle, a dark saying, an illustration, a contrast, or a story. For example, the Greek word for parable is used in Luke 4:23 with reference to the saying “physician, heal yourself” and most translations render it as “proverb.” In Mark 3:23 “parables” is used with reference to the riddles Jesus asks the scribes, such as “How can Satan cast out Satan?” Similarly, Mark 13:28 uses “parable” of a simple illustration. In Luke 18:2-5 the unjust judge is <em>contrasted<\/em> with God, who brings justice quickly. If one compares the Hebrew OT and the Septuagint (an ancient Greek translation of the OT), the word for parable is used most frequently with reference to a proverb or dark saying. The broad meaning of “parable,” then, can refer to any of these methods used to stimulate thought.<\/p>\n<p>Second, “parable” can be used of any story with two levels of meaning (literal and figurative) that functions as religious and ethical speech.<\/p>\n<p>Third, “parable” can be used technically in modern studies to distinguish it from other types of stories, such as similitudes, exemplary stories, and allegories. In this case a parable is a fictitious story that narrates a particular event and is usually told in the past tense (e.g., the parable of the lost son). A similitude, however, is a comparison that relates a typical or recurring event in real life and is usually told in the present tense (e.g., Mt 13:31-32). An exemplary story is not a comparison at all; rather, it presents character traits as either positive or negative examples to be imitated or avoided. Usually four exemplary stories are identified: the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35), the rich fool (12:16-20), the rich man and Lazarus (16:19-31), and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:10-13).<\/p>\n<p>Allegory is the most difficult to define and has caused considerable debate. Usually allegory is defined as “a series of related metaphors.” A metaphor is an implied comparison that does not use “like” or “as.” This definition is used broadly, but it is not entirely satisfactory for two reasons: (1) It does not indicate whether obscurity is an essential element in allegory. Some view allegory as needing to be decoded and as being understandable only to a select few. If, however, the allegory uses customary metaphors that all could understand, it would not be obscure. (2) It does not specify how much of the story is important as related metaphors. If there were only two or three related metaphors, would the story be an allegory? At the other extreme, do minor details in the story (such as the three levels of harvest in the parable of the sower) have significance? An example of an allegory would be the parable of the sower.<\/p>\n<p>This raises the problem of the difference between a parable and an allegory—a frequently debated issue. On definitions one and two above, allegory is included in parable. But on definition three, a distinction is made between them because a parable is not a series of related metaphors. The details of the story of the lost son (the swine, the far country, etc.) do not stand for something else as they would if they were in an allegory but rather convey in dramatic terms the depths to which the son had sunk. However, a parable is <em>not<\/em> thereby limited to one point of comparison between the story and the fact being portrayed. There may be several items that need to be mentioned from a particular parable. The parable of the lost son emphasizes the rejoicing that takes place at repentance (note the repetition of this theme in Lk 15:24, 32), but the receptivity of the father obviously parallels the grace of God and the younger and elder sons reflect sinners and religious authorities, respectively. The distinction between parable and allegory is vague at best and will vary, depending on what definitions are assigned the terms. One should note that what can be said about parable usually can also be said about allegory.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ThePurposeofParables\">The Purpose of Parables<\/p>\n<p>The purpose of parables and a description of their characteristics will assist understanding. The parables focus on God and his kingdom and in doing so reveal what kind of God he is, by what principles he works, and what he expects of humanity. Because of the focus on the kingdom, some of the parables reveal many aspects of Jesus’ mission as well (note the parable of the wicked tenants in Mt 21:33-41).<\/p>\n<p>The following characteristics of parables should be observed: (1) Parables are usually concise and symmetrical. Items are presented in twos or threes with an economy of words. Unnecessary people, motives, and details are usually omitted. (2) The features in the story are taken from everyday life, and the metaphors used are frequently common enough that they set up a context for understanding. For example, the discussion of an owner and his vineyard would naturally make hearers think of God and his people because of the OT use of those images. (3) Even though the parables speak in terms of everyday life, often they contain elements of surprise or hyperbole (an exaggeration used as a figure of speech). The parable of the good Samaritan (Lk 10:30-35) introduces a Samaritan in the story where one would probably expect a layperson. The parable of the unforgiving servant (Mt 18:23-34) puts the debt of the first servant at $10 million, an unbelievable sum in that day. (4) Parables require their hearers to pass judgment on the events of the story and, having done so, to realize that they must make a similar judgment in their own lives. The classic example is the parable of Nathan to David (2 Sm 12:1-7), where David judges the man in the story as worthy of death and then is told that he is the man. Because they force one to decide, to come to a moment of truth, the parables force their hearers to live in the present without resting on the laurels of the past or waiting for the future. The parables are the result of a mind that sees truth in concrete pictures rather than abstractions, and they teach that truth in such a compelling manner that the hearer cannot escape it.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheReasonJesusTaughtinParables\">The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables<\/p>\n<p>There is little doubt that Jesus taught in parables because they are both interesting and compelling and therefore are one of the most effective means of communicating. When one reads Mark 4:10-12, however, it seems that Jesus taught in parables in order to <em>keep<\/em> people from understanding so that they would not turn and be forgiven. It seems as well that there is a mystery that is given to the <em>in<\/em> group and that the <em>out<\/em> group is prohibited from learning. Herein is the meaning of the term “mystery.” Rather than being that which is not known or understood, as the word is used today, the biblical use of this word is usually for that which has been revealed by God and would not have been known had God not revealed it. The content of the mystery is not explained here, but from Jesus’ teaching on the kingdom elsewhere, it probably refers to the fact that the kingdom is present in Jesus’ own words and actions.<\/p>\n<p>The other factor crucial for understanding this passage is that the word “parable” in biblical usage has a broad meaning referring to any striking speech or dark saying intended to stimulate thought. Jesus did not spoon-feed his hearers; rather, he taught in such a way as to bring about a response, and where there was a response, he gave additional teaching. Consequently, it is not merely that parables are interesting, poetic, and arresting (as important as those characteristics are). In addition, parables stimulate thought and bring about response—if hardness of heart does not prevent it. It is as if Jesus were saying, “If you cannot hear what I am saying, I will reveal my thought in parables.” Where there is response to this initial teaching, additional information is given.<\/p>","summary_ro":"Parable A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels. Preview • Introduction • History of Interpretation • The Meaning of “Parable” • The Purpose of Parables • The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables Introduction An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. ...","summary_en":"Parable A particular form of Jesus’ teaching in the Gospels. Preview • Introduction • History of Interpretation • The Meaning of “Parable” • The Purpose of Parables • The Reason Jesus Taught in Parables Introduction An understanding of parables is essential if one is to understand the teaching of Jesus, since the parables make up approximately 35 percent of his recorded sayings. At no point are the vitality, relevance, and appropriateness of his teaching so clear as they are in his parables. ...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":33089,"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":61939,"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":65016,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89565,"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":92642,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117191,"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":120268,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144817,"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":147894,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":24685,"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":54861,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","summary_en":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82487,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","summary_en":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110113,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","summary_en":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137739,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:24<\/strong> <em>millions of dollars<\/em> (Greek <em>10,000 talents<\/em>): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","summary_en":"18:24 millions of dollars (Greek 10,000 talents): The talent was the highest unit of currency, but its value fluctuated. The debt was clearly impossible to pay—this amount exceeded the tax revenue of all Galilee.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"25":[{"id":11909,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Family Life and Relations","title_en":"Family Life and Relations","content_ro":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS<\/h3>\n<p>In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refer to setting up a separate dwelling as well as establishing a family. In the broader sense, “house” may refer to an entire nation (“house of Israel”). The heads of families returning from Babylon in the postexilic period controlled sometimes several hundred family members (Ezr 8:1-14). The family was a smaller part of a clan and tribe. In nomadic times the responsibilities and allegiances centered on the larger family group.<\/p>\n<p>Those who belonged to the clan knew that they had to work for common interests and accept responsibility for the whole group. All members of the family were to be protected and assisted in time of need.<\/p>\n<p>As the life of the Israelites became more settled, families (in the wider sense of the term) lived in villages surrounded by fields of wheat, barley, and flax, with areas of grazing land for sheep and goats. Each group of villages consisted of an intermarried, interdependent family group, such as that of the Danites of Zorah and Eshtaol (Jgs 18:11). The hard life of those days demanded a sharing of work and the loyal cooperation of the entire family for survival.<\/p>\n<p>As crafts and trades developed, along with a more sedentary lifestyle, sons learned their fathers’ skills and continued the family trade. Consequently, the whole village might follow a particular craft (1 Chr 4:14; Neh 11:35). By specializing in such trades, however, the villagers became less self-sufficient, depending more on farmers for food and on other specialized villages for the production of cloth or pottery (1 Chr 4:21-23).<\/p>\n<p>With the growth of cities, related groups lived together in specific areas. Many members of the tribes of Benjamin and Judah were listed in the census of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neh 11:4-8), and by the writer of Chronicles (1 Chr 9:3-9). One consequence of life in the cities was the fragmentation of the family group. As the bonds of the wider family were loosened, the unit consisted increasingly of a husband and wife with their children, living in one house. The size of houses that have been excavated precludes the idea of any larger family unit as the norm in OT societies.<\/p>\n<p>During the kingdom period, King David’s sons Amnon and Absalom set up their own separate houses (2 Sm 13:7-8, 20). At that time there were few slaves in Hebrew society, but they also were considered members of the family. As bonds of the wider family loosened, and the master of the household lost a degree of authority, the society became one in which the king was sovereign and all the people were his subjects.<\/p>\n<p>The early kings of Israel promoted such a change in order to establish a central ruling authority for the entire country. The king’s subjects fell broadly into the categories of employers and employees, corresponding to the rich and poor of society. By the eighth century <span>BC<\/span>, members of the wider family no longer worked for the communal good under the authority of the clan’s head; rather, individuals worked primarily for the good of their own immediate family. Hence one’s labor and devotion were focused more narrowly, and the greatest beneficiary was the king, the personal symbol of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>Emphasis on the smaller family unit increased, and old duties that had been willingly accepted by the wider groups in former times came to be neglected. People did not always help relatives in times of need, and they frequently had to be reminded of their obligations, particularly toward widows and orphans (Is 1:17; Jer 7:6). Family feuds also declined because members no longer felt responsible to take vengeance as a way to uphold the honor of the clan (2 Sm 3:27; 16:8; 2 Kgs 9:26). Nevertheless, Nehemiah expected Israelites to fight for their family honor (Neh 4:14). In NT times, the family was such a unit that it could be sold for a debt incurred by one of its members (Mt 18:25).<\/p>\n<p>The Hebrew religion’s emphasis on family participation in certain celebrations strengthened the small unit. The Passover, for example, was always celebrated as a family thanksgiving meal (Ex 12:3-4, 46). The prophet Samuel’s parents made a traditional annual pilgrimage to the shrine at Shiloh (1 Sm 2:19). In modern times, a young Jewish boy’s arrival at the threshold of manhood is celebrated with the Bar Mitzvah ceremony. Being so honored in the midst of a religious family preserves the ancient Hebrew tradition of family participation in religious ceremonies.<\/p>\n<p>In his preaching Jesus used the family as a symbol for the relationship of God to his people (Mt 19:14; 23:9; Lk 8:21). From the cross he handed over responsibility for the care of his mother to his disciple John (Jn 19:27).<\/p>\n<p>In NT times, the communion meals in the Jerusalem church took place by households (Acts 2:46). Early Christian meetings were held in the homes of believers because of opposition by the authorities. The book of Acts contains examples of entire families being converted to Christianity (Acts 10:24, 44-48; 16:15, 31-32). Timothy learned the gospel from his grandmother and mother (2 Tm 1:5).<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>• Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>• Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>• The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>• Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>• In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"StatusofFamilyMembers\">Status of Family Members<\/p>\n<p>From nomadic times, a father’s authority held the family group together in their encampment, and he became the symbol of their security. In ancient patriarchal societies, the father was an absolute master who had the power of life and death over family members, ruling with unchallenged authority. Although he had extensive responsibilities for those under his care, his power was awesome and his status unquestioned.<\/p>\n<p>A man’s possessions included his wife, servants, slaves, and animals (Ex 20:17; Dt 5:21). In fact, the phrase “to marry a wife” comes from a Hebrew root meaning “to become the master of a wife.” A husband was as much the master of his wife as he was of his home or his fields. Consequently, the wife addressed him in a subservient manner, as a slave would address a master (Gn 18:12; Jgs 19:26). This low status for a woman extended to a daughter’s position in the ancient household. Females were always under the authority of a male relative: first, the father; then a husband. If a woman became a widow, she was subject to her husband’s nearest male relative, who became her “redeemer.” The bride price (Gn 29:18, 27; Ex 22:16-17; 1 Sm 18:25; 2 Sm 3:14) paid by her husband was not exactly a purchase of the woman from her father, but the exchange of money did stigmatize her. The amount of a bride price depended on the father’s status (Gn 34:12). The usual price was probably 20 to 30 shekels of silver. The bride received gifts of jewelry, ornaments, and clothing from her future husband, and she occasionally enjoyed some sort of financial or material return from the bride price for her own use (Jos 15:19; Jgs 1:15). When her father or husband died, the money frequently reverted to her.<\/p>\n<p>An engaged woman was considered her fiancé’s property just as much as if she were already married to him (Dt 22:23-27). The woman left her own family at marriage, to live with and become part of her new husband’s family. Normally, any succeeding marriages would be with members of that family.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the low legal status of the mother of the family, her life was not as bad as one might suppose. She was the legal wife, not an unpaid servant, and she frequently took a strong role as adviser to her husband in family affairs. Her most important function, aside from childbearing, was organization of the household, of which she was generally the respected manager. Even though the wife might have been acquired through capture in war (Dt 21:10-14), she could not be sold as a slave or daughter could (Ex 21:7; Neh 5:5).<\/p>\n<p>Nevertheless, her position was precarious, in that she could be disowned or divorced by her husband as the result of a simple renunciation: “She is no longer my wife, and I am no longer her husband.” Perhaps he had found fault with her culinary skills, or possibly he was casting his eyes on another woman. In any event, a husband knew that if his wife did not obey even a signal or a glance, he was within his rights to obtain a divorce (cf. Ecclus 25:26). The wife, however, obtained a certain degree of protection in the letter of repudiation, by which her freedom was formally restored. Under Jewish tradition, a wife could not divorce her husband.<\/p>\n<p>In matters of domestic protocol, the Hebrew wife was not introduced to her husband’s guests, a tradition that subsequently led to considerable embarrassment for Abraham’s wife, Sarah, and for Rebekah (Gn 20:16). A woman normally remained veiled in public (24:65; 38:14; Is 47:2).<\/p>\n<p>The imagery in Proverbs 19:13 and 27:15 draws a vigorous comparison between a contentious woman and water dripping from a leaky roof. The OT leaves little doubt about the type of behavior expected from a woman. She was expected to be charming, soft-spoken, discreet, and calm (Prv 9:13; 11:16, 22; 21:9). She was also to be responsible, well-organized, intelligent, thoughtful, reverent, and a good manager of both the household and the family purse (31:10-31). A woman should also be pious and beautiful, and in NT tradition, submissive to her husband, as befitted a woman adorned with the priceless jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit (Ti 2:4-5; 1 Pt 3:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The actions of a few women whose roles in life do not seem to fit the pattern of the meek, passive female pictured above, are recorded in the Bible and the Apocrypha. The books of Judith and Esther recount heroic tales of how national fortunes were saved by women. Deborah and Jael were renowned heroines (Jgs 4–5), and the kingdom of Judah was ruled by a vicious woman, Athaliah, for several years (2 Kgs 11). The women who stepped to the forefront of public life were exceptional and few in number. Judith was a rich widow, an unusual thing in Israel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"MaritalSecurity\">Marital Security<\/p>\n<p>The security of a wife’s position improved considerably when she produced her first child, particularly if it was a son. A woman’s primary duty to her husband and his family was procreation (Gn 1:28; 9:1), and until she gave birth to a son, she feared displacement by a second wife or a concubine. Polygamous marriages were by no means rare, especially in wealthy families. They resulted in two ill-defined family groups, controlled by the mothers but under the overall authority of fathers; there were inevitable jealousies and frictions.<\/p>\n<p>The legal status of a woman was consistently poor in Bible times. With no evidence at all, a husband could accuse his wife of adultery, and she was compelled to face a trial by ordeal. She had to abase herself by taking an oath, eating dust and a cereal offering, and drinking bitter water. A priest, meanwhile, made pronouncements regarding the dire results that would come to her if she were guilty: she would become an outcast with no hope of survival. But if she maintained her serenity, and if her thigh did not rot nor her abdomen swell, she was considered to have “proved” her innocence. In such an event she would go free, and her husband bore no blame whatsoever for his false accusation (Nm 5:12-31).<\/p>\n<p>If a woman took a vow, it was legal only as long as her father or husband approved it. If she became a widow, the vow still remained in force and could be used against her (Nm 30:3-15).<\/p>\n<p>A woman in Israel was always under the protection of a male, be it her father, grandfather, great-grandfather, brother, husband, or some other member of her husband’s family. She had few legal rights and, in contrast to Babylonian traditions, could not inherit at her husband’s death. It is small wonder that widows were classed with orphans and the poor. A childless widow could on occasion return to her father’s family (Gn 38:11; Lv 22:13; Ru 1:8), thus becoming subject again to the authority of her father. A Hebrew widow could also remain with her late husband’s family. She would then come under the protection of her “redeemer,” a male relative of her husband’s family who assumed responsibility for her. If a husband died leaving a woman childless, it was the responsibility of the husband’s brother to marry her. The first son born of such a union was then regarded as the heir of the first husband.<\/p>\n<p>It was normal for a brother to accept the obligation for such a marriage (levirate). It could be refused on various grounds, but such refusal was considered dishonorable, for it was a man’s duty to perpetuate his brother’s name and to safeguard the family fortune.<\/p>\n<p>A redeemer’s responsibilities were considerable. In addition to the marriage, he was perhaps involved in avenging the family reputation, and he had to ensure that family property increased and remained within family control.<\/p>\n<p>If an Israelite fell into debt and was forced to sell himself into slavery, he would normally be “redeemed” by one of his relatives (Lv 25:47-49). If in his penury an Israelite had to sell his land or his house, the redeemer had the right of first refusal over all other prospective purchasers. It was as much his duty as his right to prevent family property from passing into the hands of strangers (v 25). The prophet Jeremiah bought his cousin Hanamel’s field under similar circumstances (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>The most familiar OT story of a childless widow, her “redeemer,” and their levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth. One of Naomi’s two sons married Ruth. When Ruth was widowed, her impoverished mother-in-law, Naomi, left her home in Moab and returned to Bethlehem to sell some of the family property. Although a close relative was prepared to buy the land and keep it in the family, he was not ready to marry Ruth as well (Ru 3:12; 4:4). He knew that a son of that union would be deemed a son of the deceased, bearing the dead husband’s name, and thus ultimately inheriting the land (4:4-6). The next relative in order of kinship was Boaz, who became Ruth’s “redeemer.” He was prepared to accept the double obligation of purchasing the land and marrying Ruth (4:9-10).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PositionofChildren\">Position of Children<\/p>\n<p>Children were generally well loved, but their childhood was short and they were often regarded as laborers for the house or fields. According to the law of primogeniture, the eldest son received a double portion of the estate as his birthright (Dt 21:17). Thus, he was assured of the position of family head. Even during his father’s lifetime, the eldest son took precedence over his brothers and sisters (Gn 43:33). Where twins were born, the first to emerge from the womb was considered the elder, with all the attendant privileges (25:24-26; 38:27-30).<\/p>\n<p>For a serious offense, the eldest son could lose the right of primogeniture (Gn 35:22; 49:3-4; 1 Chr 5:1), or it could be surrendered voluntarily, as Esau did by selling his birthright to his brother Jacob (Gn 25:29-34). There was a law protecting the eldest son from his father’s favoritism for a younger brother (Dt 21:15-17). Nevertheless, King David gave his kingdom to Solomon, his youngest son (1 Kgs 2:15).<\/p>\n<p>In a family with no sons, a daughter could inherit property (Nm 27:8). Frequently, parents consulted neither sons nor daughters when marriage partners were arranged for them. Marriage was often an alliance or contract between two families, and thus the wishes and concerns of individuals were considered unimportant. Love matches were few, although occasionally a son would marry in defiance of his parents, as Esau did (Gn 26:34-35). Although it was rare for young people to express their feelings and preferences about marriage in an open fashion, Saul’s daughter, Michal, made known her love for David (1 Sm 18:20).<\/p>\n<p>There is no record of legal adoption among the Hebrews, but it was practiced from ancient times in Mesopotamia. It was especially useful as a means of ensuring a childless couple that their land would be tilled and that they would be cared for in their old age. All examples of adoption mentioned in the OT took place outside the land of Israel (Ex 2:10; 1 Kgs 11:20; Est 2:7, 15) and are not examples of true adoption as a lifetime member of a family.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheRightsofChildren\">The Rights of Children<\/p>\n<p>The nature of patriarchal society made for unfortunate distinctions between male and female children. The position of a daughter, who could be sold into slavery or sold to be the concubine of a man and then possibly sold again (Ex 21:7-11), was certainly inferior to that of a son. In the patriarchal period, however, both a son and a daughter could be put to death for disobeying the head of the family. One’s children could also be sacrificed in worship rituals (see Gn 22; Jgs 11). It is probable that infant sacrifice was practiced by nations neighboring Israel, including Canaan and Ammon.<\/p>\n<p>The rights of children were improved considerably with the promulgation of the code of Mosaic law. A father was no longer permitted to put his child to death without referring the case to the elders (Dt 21:18-21). Both sons and daughters could be brought before such authorities and accused of being disobedient, gluttonous, or drunkards. A father’s absolute authority even extended to his married son and family if they were living under his roof. The law also prohibited children from being held responsible for the crimes of their parents (Dt 24:16). In King David’s time a person convicted by the community had the right of appeal to the king (2 Sm 14:4-11).<\/p>\n<p>In Hebrew families both parents were held in high respect. Honor had to be given to both mother and father (Ex 20:12), and the law condemned offenses against either parent (21:17; Lv 20:9; Dt 21:18; 27:16). Respect due to the mother is a recurrent theme in the Wisdom Literature (Prv 19:26; 20:20; cf. Ecclus 3:1-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DailyLifeoftheHebrewFamily\">Daily Life of the Hebrew Family<\/p>\n<p>In the everyday affairs of a Hebrew household, it was the father’s responsibility to maintain the family fortune and to be the provider. He might work in the fields, most probably with crops of flax, barley, or wheat. Or he would work at a trade, possibly as a weaver, builder, potter, dyer, fuller, or a worker in copper or bronze. If he lived near the shore, he might be a fisherman.<\/p>\n<p>The father was also responsible for the religious well-being of the family. It was his duty to take over his sons’ education from the mother at an early age, teaching them the tenets of Hebrew religion (Ex 10:2; 12:26; Dt 4:9; 6:7). He also explained all the facets of the law and the interwoven history of the nation.<\/p>\n<p>The father was the disciplinarian of the family, with the rod being used to drive home the lessons taught (Prv 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). Though children were loved and valued, they were not pampered (Ecclus 30:9-12). In postexilic times education also took place within the precincts of the synagogue, and shortly before the time of Christ, a general elementary education was introduced. It was also imperative that a father teach his sons a trade, normally his own, for a man without a trade either starved or became a thief. Another important paternal responsibility was to provide wives for male offspring in the household.<\/p>\n<p>The mother was responsible for her sons’ and daughters’ early education (Prv 1:8; 6:20), teaching them religious songs and prayers as soon as they could talk. A father took over the education of his sons, but the mother continued with the daughters, training them to spin, weave, cook, clean, trim the lamps, and generally to become competent in all the household duties (31:13-31).<\/p>\n<p>With little furniture, keeping a house clean meant sweeping the floors to keep them free from dust and dirt. Cooking was at once simple and difficult. It was simple in that much of the food was cooked in the form of a soup or stew, or else made into a cake and cooked on a griddle. It was difficult in that the corn had to be ground by hand and bread was baked daily.<\/p>\n<p>A mother was expected to take wool, card it, spin it, and often weave and make clothes for her family. In addition, she would help her husband in the fields at harvesttime. Because many families had one or more olive trees, a few grapevines, and fig trees, the mother would also assist in picking the fruit. She would sometimes work at the press when the olives or grapes were being processed. Frequently the treading of grapes in the family vat would be done together by husband and wife. Drawing water from the well was considered a menial task and was generally the wife’s responsibility, although sometimes it was assigned to the children (Gn 24:15-16).<\/p>\n<p>As in all societies, there was a time when children laughed and played together (Zec 8:5; Mt 11:16), although childhood and adolescence were not recognized as specific stages of development. Children were considered as sucklings if under three, but were regarded as boys or girls when they were able to take care of themselves. A small child sat on his mother’s lap and was played with (Is 66:12). There is no evidence of organized sports for children. Toys, including whistles, rattles, dolls, and miniature cooking utensils, have been excavated at Palestinian sites.<\/p>\n<p>As soon as a boy was old enough, he took his place in the family and accepted his appointed task. Among other things, children were expected to gather fuel (Jer 7:18). Young boys and girls tended the flocks. The sheep had to be protected from marauding wild beasts, guarded against their own folly when they wandered near crevices, steered toward good pasture and water, and carried home when sick or injured (Gn 29:6; Ex 2:16). The care of cattle was also the responsibility of children (1 Sm 16:11). Of necessity, boys were trained in the various arts of war.<\/p>\n<p>Children sometimes joined their fathers in the fields, and their presence was always welcome. From earliest times, boys in particular would watch their fathers until they too picked up a tool or implement to try their skill; girls watched and learned from their mothers. Young children frequently listened to the talk of the elders at the city gates or in the villages. A visit to a sanctuary at festival time was a family affair, furnishing an ideal learning experience. As a child, Jesus accompanied his parents, Mary and Joseph, to the temple in Jerusalem (Lk 2:42-47).<\/p>\n<p>Young girls were surprisingly free to go about their appointed tasks. They were not secluded or veiled and could visit uninhibited with friends and neighbors (Gn 34:1). They were also able to converse with men without embarrassment (24:15-25; 29:11-12; 1 Sm 9:11-13).<\/p>\n<p>Mealtimes were strictly family times. It is doubtful whether a meal comparable to a breakfast was eaten, and a farmer would probably have a light lunch in the fields. The main meal of the day was prepared by the mother, and it would be eaten in the early evening. Although the variety of food available was limited, its preparation was time-consuming.<\/p>\n<p>Feast times were periods of great religious significance and were also the days when family members participated in the symbolic rituals of their faith. Among the Israelites several kinds of food were fundamental to their religious ritual. Family unity and the national religion were molded together by special meals in the home.<\/p>\n<p>Daylight played an important part in the daily habits of the people in antiquity. Although oil lamps were readily available in later periods, it was customary to rise with the sun and go to bed relatively soon after dark. The wife would probably be up before sunrise and might continue her labor after dark.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"InNewTestamentTimes\">In New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>By NT times, for those who followed the Greek and Roman style, life became more elegant. Despite that, the status of many family members did not change substantially. Wealthier families had more slaves, and the children were more likely to have formal education, sometimes spending less effort on family chores. Even in Roman times, however, the father still had a legal right to accept or reject his child.<\/p>\n<p>The status of the woman had definitely improved by the NT period. A Roman matron was highly respected and exerted a strong influence over her husband. She was not sequestered in a particular section of the house, as a Greek woman was, but managed and supervised tasks in any part of her home. She helped her husband in business, had her own place in theaters, games, and religious festivals, and sometimes managed her own property. Palestinian women began to enjoy a new status and dignity as the result of Jesus’ attitude toward women and its influence on the early Christian church.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Education; Marriage, Marriage Customs; Sex, Sexuality; Widow; Woman.<\/p>","summary_ro":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","summary_en":"FAMILY LIFE AND RELATIONS In Bible times, the family comprised members of a household, including not only parents and children, along with other relatives and concubines, but also servants, travelers, aliens, and anyone else who happened to be within the house and was therefore under the protection of the head of the family. The family of Jacob, for example, comprised three generations (Gn 46:8-26). Biblically, the term “family” is interchangeable with “house,” and “founding a house” can refe...","source":"Articles\/F.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":29035,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Patience","title_en":"Patience","content_ro":"<h3>PATIENCE<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to take a great deal of punishment from evil people or circumstances without losing one’s temper, without becoming irritated and angry, or without taking vengeance. It includes the capacity to bear pain or trials without complaint, the ability to forbear under severe provocation, and the self-control that keeps one from acting rashly even though suffering opposition or adversity.<\/p>\n<p>The usual Hebrew expression for patience is related to the verb “to be long” and involves the idea of being long to get riled or slow to become angry. Two different Greek words were translated by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators with the word “patience.” One of the words has the idea of “remaining firm under” tests and trials and is better translated “endurance” or “steadfastness.” The other Greek word is related to the above Hebrew meaning and refers to patience as “long-spiritedness” or “calmness of spirit” even though under severe provocation to lose one’s temper.<\/p>\n<p>The great biblical illustration of patience in operation is God himself. Several passages speak of him, in conjunction with other gracious attributes, as “slow to anger.” In a context that stresses Israel’s rebellion and provocation of God, he is contrasted as a God who is forgiving, gracious, compassionate, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness (Neh 9:17). The psalmist declares, “Thou, O Lord, art a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ps 86:15, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also Ex 34:6; Nm 14:18; Ps 103:8; Jl 2:13; Jon 4:2). In addition, the virtue of a patient spirit on the part of mankind is extolled in the OT, especially in Proverbs (Prv 14:29; 15:18; 16:32; 25:15; see also Eccl 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also stresses the patience of the Lord. It is God’s kindness, forbearance, and patience that lead people to repentance (Rom 2:4). God was patient in holding off the Flood for the sinners of Noah’s day while the ark was being built, thereby giving more time for repentance (1 Pt 3:20). Probably the greatest of the NT references to God’s patience is in 2 Peter 3:9. The delay in Christ’s return is not an indication of slowness on God’s part, says Peter, but of his long-suffering, not being willing that anyone should perish. A specific reference to Jesus Christ’s patience is made by Paul, who claimed that, in his case, Jesus was able to demonstrate perfect patience (1 Tm 1:16).<\/p>\n<p>Patience, which is an attribute of our God and of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also to characterize each Christian. Paul’s prayer for the Colossians is that they might demonstrate this quality (Col 1:11). It is one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), an attribute of love (1 Cor 13:4), and a virtue (Col 3:12; see also 2 Tm 3:10). In addition, Christians are exhorted to be patient (1 Thes 5:14). If we are not, we will be treated as the slave in a parable that Jesus told. This slave pleaded with his lord, to whom he owed a great sum, for patience, promising to pay all. The lord was patient and forgave all the debt, until he found out that the slave had refused to show the same patience to a fellow servant who owed him a pittance in comparison (Mt 18:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>In some contexts, the word “patience” takes on the more general meaning of waiting long and expectantly for something. The farmer waits patiently for the crop to come (Jas 5:7b). Abraham waited patiently for God’s promise to give him the land of Canaan to be fulfilled and died without seeing what was promised, although still believing (Heb 6:15; 11:39). Finally, all Christians are commanded to be long-suffering until the coming of the Lord (Jas 5:7a).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PATIENCE<\/h3>\n<p>Ability to take a great deal of punishment from evil people or circumstances without losing one’s temper, without becoming irritated and angry, or without taking vengeance. It includes the capacity to bear pain or trials without complaint, the ability to forbear under severe provocation, and the self-control that keeps one from acting rashly even though suffering opposition or adversity.<\/p>\n<p>The usual Hebrew expression for patience is related to the verb “to be long” and involves the idea of being long to get riled or slow to become angry. Two different Greek words were translated by the <span>kjv<\/span> translators with the word “patience.” One of the words has the idea of “remaining firm under” tests and trials and is better translated “endurance” or “steadfastness.” The other Greek word is related to the above Hebrew meaning and refers to patience as “long-spiritedness” or “calmness of spirit” even though under severe provocation to lose one’s temper.<\/p>\n<p>The great biblical illustration of patience in operation is God himself. Several passages speak of him, in conjunction with other gracious attributes, as “slow to anger.” In a context that stresses Israel’s rebellion and provocation of God, he is contrasted as a God who is forgiving, gracious, compassionate, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness (Neh 9:17). The psalmist declares, “Thou, O Lord, art a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Ps 86:15, <span>rsv<\/span>; see also Ex 34:6; Nm 14:18; Ps 103:8; Jl 2:13; Jon 4:2). In addition, the virtue of a patient spirit on the part of mankind is extolled in the OT, especially in Proverbs (Prv 14:29; 15:18; 16:32; 25:15; see also Eccl 7:8).<\/p>\n<p>The NT also stresses the patience of the Lord. It is God’s kindness, forbearance, and patience that lead people to repentance (Rom 2:4). God was patient in holding off the Flood for the sinners of Noah’s day while the ark was being built, thereby giving more time for repentance (1 Pt 3:20). Probably the greatest of the NT references to God’s patience is in 2 Peter 3:9. The delay in Christ’s return is not an indication of slowness on God’s part, says Peter, but of his long-suffering, not being willing that anyone should perish. A specific reference to Jesus Christ’s patience is made by Paul, who claimed that, in his case, Jesus was able to demonstrate perfect patience (1 Tm 1:16).<\/p>\n<p>Patience, which is an attribute of our God and of our Lord Jesus Christ, is also to characterize each Christian. Paul’s prayer for the Colossians is that they might demonstrate this quality (Col 1:11). It is one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22), an attribute of love (1 Cor 13:4), and a virtue (Col 3:12; see also 2 Tm 3:10). In addition, Christians are exhorted to be patient (1 Thes 5:14). If we are not, we will be treated as the slave in a parable that Jesus told. This slave pleaded with his lord, to whom he owed a great sum, for patience, promising to pay all. The lord was patient and forgave all the debt, until he found out that the slave had refused to show the same patience to a fellow servant who owed him a pittance in comparison (Mt 18:26-29).<\/p>\n<p>In some contexts, the word “patience” takes on the more general meaning of waiting long and expectantly for something. The farmer waits patiently for the crop to come (Jas 5:7b). Abraham waited patiently for God’s promise to give him the land of Canaan to be fulfilled and died without seeing what was promised, although still believing (Heb 6:15; 11:39). Finally, all Christians are commanded to be long-suffering until the coming of the Lord (Jas 5:7a).<\/p>","summary_ro":"PATIENCE Ability to take a great deal of punishment from evil people or circumstances without losing one’s temper, without becoming irritated and angry, or without taking vengeance. It includes the capacity to bear pain or trials without complaint, the ability to forbear under severe provocation, and the self-control that keeps one from acting rashly even though suffering opposition or adversity. The usual Hebrew expression for patience is related to the verb “to be long” and involves the ide...","summary_en":"PATIENCE Ability to take a great deal of punishment from evil people or circumstances without losing one’s temper, without becoming irritated and angry, or without taking vengeance. It includes the capacity to bear pain or trials without complaint, the ability to forbear under severe provocation, and the self-control that keeps one from acting rashly even though suffering opposition or adversity. The usual Hebrew expression for patience is related to the verb “to be long” and involves the ide...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54862,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","summary_en":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82488,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","summary_en":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110114,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","summary_en":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137740,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:26","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:26","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:26<\/strong> <em>I will pay it all:<\/em> The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","summary_en":"18:26 I will pay it all: The exaggerated debt and the slave’s promise amplify the greatness of the king’s mercy and the slave’s unforgiving attitude (18:29-30).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":65018,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92644,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120270,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147896,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Compassionate Healer","title_en":"Compassionate Healer","content_ro":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Compassionate Healer<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had compassion” refers only to Jesus directly, but is also used in parables where it can refer to God the Father or to Jesus (Matt 18:27; Luke 10:33; 15:20).<\/p>\n<p>In the Old Testament, the term compassion is used for God’s covenant love for Israel. God withdrew this compassion to judge Israel’s obstinate unfaithfulness (Isa 27:11; 63:15; Jer 13:14). God restored his compassion when Israel repented (Deut 13:18; 30:2-3; Prov 28:13; Isa 55:7). The Old Testament often describes the messianic age as a time of God’s compassion (Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:8, 10; 60:10; Jer 12:15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:19; Hab 3:2; Zech 10:6). The resurgence of this notion in the Gospels reflects this, as the messianic age has dawned and God’s covenant love is once again active in Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:18; 30:3; 1 Kgs 8:50-51; Prov 28:13; Isa 14:1; 49:10, 13; 54:7-10; 55:7; 60:10; Jer 12:14-15; 33:26; Ezek 39:25; Mic 7:18-20; Hab 3:2; Zech 1:16; 10:6; Matt 9:35-36; 14:14; 15:32; 18:23-30; 20:29-34; Luke 10:33-37; 15:20-32<\/p>","summary_ro":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","summary_en":"Compassionate Healer Jesus is frequently described as one who “had compassion.” This expression (sometimes translated “felt sorry” or “took pity”) is used of Jesus in complex situations where (1) distress is expressed (Matt 18:23-26; 20:29-33) and Jesus remedies the distress (Matt 18:27; 20:34), (2) Jesus shows deep emotion (Matt 14:14; 15:32; 18:27; 20:34), or (3) there is a contrast with those who are not compassionate (Matt 9:32-36; 18:27-30; 20:29-34). In the Gospels, the phrase “had comp...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":29469,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Pence*","title_en":"Pence*","content_ro":"<h3>PENCE*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. <em>See<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PENCE*<\/h3>\n<p>KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. <em>See<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PENCE* KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. See Coins; Money.","summary_en":"PENCE* KJV form of denarius in Matthew 18:28, Mark 14:5, Luke 7:41, 10:35, and John 12:5. See Coins; Money.","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54863,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","summary_en":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82489,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","summary_en":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110115,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","summary_en":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137741,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:28<\/strong> <em>a few thousand dollars:<\/em> The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","summary_en":"18:28 a few thousand dollars: The first servant’s debt was about one million times greater than this sum owed to him.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":40067,"type":"textbox","type_label":"Notă explicativă","type_icon":"💡","type_color":"#8b5cf6","title_ro":"Guidelines for Interpreting Parables","title_en":"Guidelines for Interpreting Parables","content_ro":"<h3>Guidelines for Interpreting Parables<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Interpreting the parables is not easy, but certain guidelines can be presented that will avoid past errors and make sane interpretation possible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<li>1. Analyze the parable thoroughly. Note the characters and movement of the story, its climax, and the repetition of key words or ideas. If it appears in more than one Gospel, do a comparative analysis of the various accounts to note both similarities and differences.<\/li>\n<li>2. Listen to the parable without any preconceptions as to its form or its meaning. Attempt to hear the parable as if sitting at the feet of Jesus without knowing the parable, its meaning, and Christian theology. While it is impossible for a modern reader to become a first-century Jewish hearer, it is imperative that a parable be interpreted in its original context and in the ways its author originally intended it to be understood.<\/li>\n<li>3. Look for help in the surrounding context, but realize that the original context for many of the parables has not been preserved. Often the parables appear where they do in the Gospels because of the arrangement of the Gospel writers.<\/li>\n<li>4. Notice features in the parable that reflect the life and thinking of the first-century world. An understanding of cultural and religious factors, and an awareness of the OT ideas reflected in a parable, will greatly assist in its interpretation.<\/li>\n<li>5. Note how the parable fits into the purpose and plan of the entire book. If the parable is present in the other Gospels, note its location and how it has been shaped to fit into the purpose of each Gospel writer.<\/li>\n<li>6. Determine as explicitly as possible the message of the parable in the teaching of Jesus. There may be several points that need to be made in a given parable, as was indicated above for the parable of the lost son. There may be legitimate secondary features in the parable, but be careful not to push the story too far. One should exercise caution since it is easy to violate a parable’s intention. No one would want to suggest that God has tormentors on the basis of the parable of the unforgiving servant (see Mt 18:34); rather, this verse points out the seriousness of the sin and its judgment. However, some people wrongly overemphasize minor features of other parables. If one will interpret the parable as a whole—in keeping with its original intention—such errors will be minimized.<\/li>\n<li>7. Note where the teaching of the parable conforms to the teaching of Jesus elsewhere. Jesus’ nonparabolic teaching may provide the key for, or strengthen, the interpretation of a parable.<\/li>\n<li>8. Give due emphasis to the “rule of end stress.” Usually the climax and the most important part of a parable comes at its conclusion. Consequently, the focus of the interpretation should be there as well. Often, the end of the parable will include the theme of reversal. As elsewhere in the teaching of Jesus, his statement on a given topic is often the exact reverse of what others say or expect. Note Matthew 10:39: “If you cling to your life, you will lose it; but if you give it up for me, you will find it” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parable of the workers in the vineyard tells of those who receive less than they expected and closes with a classic reversal statement: “the last shall be first and the first last” (Mt 20:16; cf. 19:30). Note the reversal in Matthew 21:31 at the end of the parable of the two sons (21:28-30). After the religious authorities had made a judgment on the basis of the parable, the reversal is accomplished as they are told that the tax collectors and prostitutes were going into the kingdom of God before them (vv 31-32).<\/li>\n<li>9. Determine what principles are present in the parable that reveal the nature of God, his kingdom, the way he deals with humanity, or what he expects of humanity.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>Guidelines for Interpreting Parables<\/h3>\n<blockquote><p>Interpreting the parables is not easy, but certain guidelines can be presented that will avoid past errors and make sane interpretation possible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<li>1. Analyze the parable thoroughly. Note the characters and movement of the story, its climax, and the repetition of key words or ideas. If it appears in more than one Gospel, do a comparative analysis of the various accounts to note both similarities and differences.<\/li>\n<li>2. Listen to the parable without any preconceptions as to its form or its meaning. Attempt to hear the parable as if sitting at the feet of Jesus without knowing the parable, its meaning, and Christian theology. While it is impossible for a modern reader to become a first-century Jewish hearer, it is imperative that a parable be interpreted in its original context and in the ways its author originally intended it to be understood.<\/li>\n<li>3. Look for help in the surrounding context, but realize that the original context for many of the parables has not been preserved. Often the parables appear where they do in the Gospels because of the arrangement of the Gospel writers.<\/li>\n<li>4. Notice features in the parable that reflect the life and thinking of the first-century world. An understanding of cultural and religious factors, and an awareness of the OT ideas reflected in a parable, will greatly assist in its interpretation.<\/li>\n<li>5. Note how the parable fits into the purpose and plan of the entire book. If the parable is present in the other Gospels, note its location and how it has been shaped to fit into the purpose of each Gospel writer.<\/li>\n<li>6. Determine as explicitly as possible the message of the parable in the teaching of Jesus. There may be several points that need to be made in a given parable, as was indicated above for the parable of the lost son. There may be legitimate secondary features in the parable, but be careful not to push the story too far. One should exercise caution since it is easy to violate a parable’s intention. No one would want to suggest that God has tormentors on the basis of the parable of the unforgiving servant (see Mt 18:34); rather, this verse points out the seriousness of the sin and its judgment. However, some people wrongly overemphasize minor features of other parables. If one will interpret the parable as a whole—in keeping with its original intention—such errors will be minimized.<\/li>\n<li>7. Note where the teaching of the parable conforms to the teaching of Jesus elsewhere. Jesus’ nonparabolic teaching may provide the key for, or strengthen, the interpretation of a parable.<\/li>\n<li>8. Give due emphasis to the “rule of end stress.” Usually the climax and the most important part of a parable comes at its conclusion. Consequently, the focus of the interpretation should be there as well. Often, the end of the parable will include the theme of reversal. As elsewhere in the teaching of Jesus, his statement on a given topic is often the exact reverse of what others say or expect. Note Matthew 10:39: “If you cling to your life, you will lose it; but if you give it up for me, you will find it” (<span>nlt<\/span>). The parable of the workers in the vineyard tells of those who receive less than they expected and closes with a classic reversal statement: “the last shall be first and the first last” (Mt 20:16; cf. 19:30). Note the reversal in Matthew 21:31 at the end of the parable of the two sons (21:28-30). After the religious authorities had made a judgment on the basis of the parable, the reversal is accomplished as they are told that the tax collectors and prostitutes were going into the kingdom of God before them (vv 31-32).<\/li>\n<li>9. Determine what principles are present in the parable that reveal the nature of God, his kingdom, the way he deals with humanity, or what he expects of humanity.<\/li>","summary_ro":"Guidelines for Interpreting Parables Interpreting the parables is not easy, but certain guidelines can be presented that will avoid past errors and make sane interpretation possible. 1. Analyze the parable thoroughly. Note the characters and movement of the story, its climax, and the repetition of key words or ideas. If it appears in more than one Gospel, do a comparative analysis of the various accounts to note both similarities and differences. 2. Listen to the parable without any preconcep...","summary_en":"Guidelines for Interpreting Parables Interpreting the parables is not easy, but certain guidelines can be presented that will avoid past errors and make sane interpretation possible. 1. Analyze the parable thoroughly. Note the characters and movement of the story, its climax, and the repetition of key words or ideas. If it appears in more than one Gospel, do a comparative analysis of the various accounts to note both similarities and differences. 2. Listen to the parable without any preconcep...","source":"Textboxes\/Textboxes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54864,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","summary_en":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82490,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","summary_en":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110116,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","summary_en":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137742,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:34","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:34","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:34<\/strong> This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • <em>until he had paid his entire debt:<\/em> I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","summary_en":"18:34 This is how God responds (18:35) to anyone unwilling to forgive. • until he had paid his entire debt: I.e., permanently, because he could never repay.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"35":[{"id":54865,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","summary_en":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82491,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","summary_en":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110117,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","summary_en":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137743,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 18:35","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 18:35","content_ro":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>18:35<\/strong> <em>That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you:<\/em> Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).<\/p>","summary_ro":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","summary_en":"18:35 That’s what my heavenly Father will do to you: Prison and torture (18:34) is thus a metaphor for hell (see 5:22).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Matei 18
— 35 versete
Matei 18
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse