Citește Biblia

{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":13178,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Galilee","title_en":"Galilee","content_ro":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>GALILEE<\/h3>\n<p>Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.”<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"HistoricalBackground\">Historical Background<\/p>\n<p>In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Jos 20:7; cf. 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76).<\/p>\n<p>Galilee originally designated the area occupied by the tribes of Naphtali, Zebulun (Is 9:1), and possibly Asher (if Cabul in Jos 19:27 is the same city as in 1 Kgs 9:11-13). None of those tribes was able to completely expel the original Canaanite inhabitants (Jgs 1:30-33; 2:1-4), and as a result, Galilee tended to be racially mixed. The cities that King Solomon gave to Hiram, gentile king of Tyre, were within Galilee (1 Kgs 9:11), and the gentile intermixture in that area may have influenced Solomon’s choice of those cities for a gift. This racially mixed condition is also the probable basis for the designation in Isaiah 9:1, “Galilee of the nations” (cf. Mt 4:15; 1 Macc 5:15).<\/p>\n<p>During the monarchy, Galilee was a buffer zone between Israel and Syria, and it bore the brunt of Syrian invasions against Israel. This fact is cited by the prophet Isaiah (Is 9:1), but he saw it as the prelude to a brighter day when the messianic king would reign. Galilee was conquered by Syrian King Ben-hadad (1 Kgs 15:20) and was probably recovered by Israel’s King Ahab. Galilee was later subjugated by the Arameans under Hazael (2 Kgs 10:32; 12:18; 13:22) and regained by Jeroboam II (2 Kgs 14:23-25). As a result of Assyrian conquests in the area of Damascus and Galilee in 732 <span>BC<\/span> by Tiglath-pileser III (2 Kgs 15:29), more Gentiles were imported into the area while many of the Jewish inhabitants were deported. This naturally led to greater gentile influence and domination in Galilee. Under the successive influence of Babylonia, Persia, Greece, and Syria, Galilee was constantly experiencing infiltration and migration. From the time of the Assyrian conquest of Israel to about the end of the second century <span>BC<\/span>, Galilee’s population was dominated by Gentiles, with only a few Jews.<\/p>\n<p>The Jews remaining in Galilee were brought to Judea by Simon Maccabeus in 164 <span>BC<\/span> (1 Macc 5:21-23). Galilee was conquered by Aristobulus I (104–103 <span>BC<\/span>), who forced the inhabitants to be circumcised and to submit to Jewish laws, a work that probably already had been initiated by John Hyrcanus (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<p>Herod the Great (ruler under Rome, 37–4 <span>BC<\/span>) affixed Galilee to his kingdom, and more Jews were attracted there. Josephus recorded that Galilee had 240 cities and villages and 100,000 men available to fight against the Romans. After the death of Herod the Great, Galilee was included in the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas (4 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 39). With the banishment of Herod Antipas in <span>AD<\/span> 39, Galilee was added to the territory of Herod Agrippa I, who ruled it until he died in <span>AD<\/span> 44. Rome directly administered Galilee until it was put under the rule of Herod Agrippa II. By siding with the Romans during the Jewish revolts, he was able to retain his position until <span>AD<\/span> 100. In spite of the Galileans’ attempt to gain independence, the revolutionary faction was brought under subjection by Vespasian in <span>AD<\/span> 67. After Herod Agrippa II’s death, Galilee became part of the Roman province of Syria.<\/p>\n<p>Following the fall of Jerusalem in <span>AD<\/span> 70, the Sanhedrin and many other Jews of southern Palestine flocked to Galilee. As a result, such cities as Tiberias and Sepphoris became Jewish, and the dispersed Jews came to think of Galilee as their center. Tiberias became a center for Jewish learning, and it was there that such major contributions as the Tiberian system of vowel pointing the Hebrew consonantal text were made, as well as the formulation of the Mishnah and the Palestinian Talmud.<\/p>\n<p>From about <span>AD<\/span> 451 until the Muslim rule over Galilee began in the seventh century, Galilee was governed by the Christian patriarchate of Jerusalem, set up by the Council of Chalcedon in <span>AD<\/span> 451. Muslim rule from the seventh century on was continuous except for the intervals caused by the twelfth-century Crusades and World War I. All of Galilee has been included in the modern state of Israel since its establishment in 1948.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Boundaries\">Boundaries<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was bounded on the east by the upper Jordan River and the Sea of Galilee and on the south by the plain of Esdraelon, which served as a natural boundary between Galilee and Samaria. At times the plain was included in Galilee, as it was during the intertestamental period (1 Macc 10:30; 12:47-49). While the northern boundary was uncertain and variable during Galilee’s history, in NT times it reached to Lake Huleh. The western boundary followed the Mediterranean Sea to Mt Carmel.<\/p>\n<p>From the time of the divided kingdom until the Assyrian conquest of Galilee (734 <span>BC<\/span>), it was the northernmost part of the kingdom of Israel. The area was divided into upper Galilee and lower Galilee by the plain of Ramah, which ran between Capernaum and Ptolemais (cf. Jdt 1:8; 1 Macc 12:49; Josephus’s <em>War<\/em> 3.3.1). In the Mishnah (compilation of early rabbinical interpretation of the Law), Galilee is divided into three parts corresponding to the natural divisions of plain, hill country, and mountain. Under Roman rule, Galilee was about 25 to 30 miles (40 to 50 kilometers) from east to west and about 35 to 40 miles (55 to 65 kilometers) from north to south.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Geography\">Geography<\/p>\n<p>The attractive Galilean landscape is made up of volcanic limestone hills and fertile alluvial plains. Its climate is cooler than that of any other part of Palestine, and its beauty and fertility contrast sharply with the barren, sun-baked hills of southern Palestine.<\/p>\n<p>The physical features range from the high mountains in the north to the plain of Esdraelon in the south. Mt Tabor is prominent on the east, while Mt Carmel stands out on the west. Much of upper Galilee is 3,000 feet (914.4 meters) above sea level, and in NT times it was largely forested and less densely inhabited than lower Galilee. Lower Galilee starts at 1,500 to 2,000 feet (450 to 600 meters) above sea level and descends sharply to the Sea of Galilee, more than 600 feet (182.9 meters) below sea level.<\/p>\n<p>Besides the average annual rainfall of 25 inches (63.5 centimeters), Galilee is watered by the streams that flow from springs in the hills and are the main sources of the beautiful Kishon River at Janin, and the headwaters of the Jordan River, the largest river in Palestine. The ground is also moistened by heavy dews resulting from climatic conditions created by the Lebanon mountain range to the north.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Cities\">Cities<\/p>\n<p>Among the more notable cities in Galilee’s early history were Kedesh in Naphtali, a city of refuge (Jos 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chr 6:76), and Hazor, about 10 miles (16.1 kilometers) north of the Sea of Galilee (Jos 11:10; 1 Kgs 9:15). During the time of Christ, Chorazin (Mt 11:21) and Capernaum (4:13; 11:23) were prominent cities located in the northeast near the Sea of Galilee. Capernaum seems to have been a center for Jesus’ ministry in the area (Mt 4:13; Mk 2:1; 9:33; etc.). Nazareth is especially significant as the city of Christ’s childhood (Mt 2:22-23; Lk 2:39; 4:16; etc.). Nain (Lk 7:11-17), located on the northern edge of the mountain now called Little Hermon, and Cana of Galilee (Jn 2:1-11) also figured prominently in Christ’s ministry. Sepphoris and Tiberias were important cities during Roman administration.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RoadsandTravel\">Roads and Travel<\/p>\n<p>Many roads traversed Galilee, and those in NT times were superior due to Roman construction and maintenance.<\/p>\n<p>Among the best-known trade routes was the Via Maris (the Way of the Sea), which ran through Galilee on its way from Damascus to Egypt. Another main road ran from Tiberias, near the Sea of Galilee, to Acco (Ptolemais), a port on the Phoenician coast. Major caravan routes also connected Galilee with the markets of the East. The area was tied together by a network of spurs and connecting roads that branched from the main highways.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Inhabitants\">Inhabitants<\/p>\n<p>The occupants of Galilee (Galileans) were basically Jewish in religious and patriotic orientation, but they were composed of various ethnic elements. The influence of this mixture was sufficient to cause recognizable differences in speech from that of southern Palestine (cf. Mt 26:69, 73). The Galileans absorbed more Greek and Roman influences than did the Judean Jews. The racial mixture, differences in speech, and location caused Judean Jews to view Galilee and its inhabitants with contempt (Jn 1:46; 7:41, 52).<\/p>\n<p>Lower Galilee was densely settled with villages, and in NT times the population was probably about three million. The fertility of the soil and resultant fruitfulness of the country produced a prosperous Jewish populace, particularly in the centuries immediately after the time of Christ.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Government\">Government<\/p>\n<p>Galilee was under the Roman rule of emperors Augustus and Tiberius during the time of Christ. Roman fortifications throughout Galilee were a constant reminder of the presence and influence of the Roman Empire. During Christ’s ministry, Rome installed the tetrarch Herod Antipas (Mt 14:1; Lk 23:5-7) to rule the territory. He was appointed to office when 17 years old. Sepphoris was his first capital; in about <span>AD<\/span> 22 he built Tiberias on the shore of the Sea of Galilee as his new capital, in honor of the emperor.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Products\">Products<\/p>\n<p>Abundant crops enabled Galilee to provide produce for the neighboring Phoenician cities of Tyre and Sidon around the middle of the first century <span>AD<\/span>. Main crops included grapes, pomegranates, olives, and grains. Fishing in the Sea of Galilee was a prominent business in NT times (Mk 1:14-20).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"JesusandGalilee\">Jesus and Galilee<\/p>\n<p>Jesus was raised in Galilee (Lk 4:16), and 11 of his 12 disciples were from there (Judas Iscariot was the only Judean).<\/p>\n<p>The culture, commerce, farming, and fishing business of the area formed the background for much of Jesus’ ministry, as his parables show (Mt 20:1-8; 21:33; Mk 4:3; Lk 13:6-9). The first three Gospels are largely occupied with Christ’s ministry in Galilee, with much of it being spent around the Sea of Galilee. Most of his parables (19 of 32) were spoken here, and the vast majority of his miracles (25 of 33) were performed in Galilee. Jesus received his greatest response in this region. The Sermon on the Mount was spoken in Galilee, and one of its mountains was the scene of the Lord’s transfiguration. Many of the women who followed Christ and ministered to him also came from there (Mt 27:55). Two of Christ’s most significant postresurrection appearances took place in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Jn 21:1-23), and one of Christ’s own titles, Jesus of Nazareth (Jn 1:45), identified him as a Galilean.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Galileans\">Galileans<\/p>\n<p>Since Jesus and most of the 12 disciples were from Galilee, it was natural for the term to be applied to all of his followers, especially since it implied that the movement was not as pure as Judean Judaism. Some interpreters believe that Luke 22:59 is an example of the use of “Galilean” as a title; in Acts 1:11 and 2:7 it is merely a geographical reference. One sure reference to Christians by that title appears in the work of the pagan philosopher Epictetus (<span>AD<\/span> 50?–135?), who was impressed with how Christians died for their faith. It is not clear how common the title of Galilean was, but it had obviously spread from Judea to Rome, where Epictetus lived.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Palestine; Sea of Galilee.<\/p>","summary_ro":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","summary_en":"GALILEE Area in northern Palestine that, in Israel’s earlier history, had boundaries that were not clearly defined but that became more precisely defined in the period of Roman rule. The English name Galilee comes from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” Historical Background In OT times Galilee was not significant in Israelite life, but in NT times it was a prominent Jewish population center. Galilee is first mentioned in the Bible as the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in...","source":"Articles\/G.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14554,"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":24798,"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":33036,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Reward","title_en":"Reward","content_ro":"<h3>REWARD<\/h3>\n<p>Recompense for good or evil; most often it suggests a benefit for favorable compensation. Both good and evil are rewarded or punished, and man’s responsibility and accountability are involved in an ethical sense. Related terms such as “wages,” “hire,” “recompense,” or “requital” are a part of the broader concept. In this fullest sense, the operation of reward ranges from the consequences resulting from dealings between people to God’s compensation for obedience or disobedience, from the consequences of actions felt in this life to divine recompense in the life to come.<\/p>\n<p>To Greek and Hebrew minds, the concept of reward suggested the ideal of the wholeness of an action, the completion of a deed. Just as work was completed for a man in the payment of wages, so it was assumed that an action naturally carried certain results, either reward or punishment. The overtones of commercial transactions were not absent, as when the reward is referred to as “wages.” Thus Paul says, “The wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23). The idea involves an equal return commensurate with the action performed.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical conception of reward was both ethical and religious. The covenant of God made with Israel was evidence of God’s loving favor; it promised good things to Israel on the condition of their obedience to God’s commands. Disobedience was a violation of the covenant and would bring disaster and death. Deuteronomy 28 spells out the blessings that obedience would bring and also the national disasters that would come upon Israel if they did not observe what was right and good in the sight of the Lord (see also Lv 26). In the period of the wilderness wanderings, failure to obey on the part of the people and their leaders brought suffering and death. The history of the judges and the kings was written in terms of reward for faithfulness and punishment for sin and idolatry. Earthly victory and the national welfare depended on obedience and faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 1:7-9; cf. Jgs 2).<\/p>\n<p>The pattern of reward and punishment was not always carried out. The Jews believed that God would be a merciful, forgiving God. Forgiveness involved the removal of the punishment for sin. “He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor requite us according to our iniquities” (Ps 103:10, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Ecclesiastes found that life did not work out so neatly and that the doctrine of retribution did not always apply in the span of an individual life. There is a somewhat cynical note when the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper. Job’s friends take the position that his sickness is the result of some hidden sin. Job maintains his integrity, and for him the answer lies outside the pattern of strict reward for righteousness and punishment for evil. In the outcome Job is rewarded for his good life.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesus’ day Judaism had changed significantly. The legal system of the judges had been replaced with Roman law. But Judaism had no hesitation about recognizing the merit of good works and exhorting people to accumulate a store of merit on a basis of which God would bless them (Tb 4:7-10; Ecclus 51:30). The Pharisees believed that accurate and conscientious observance of the law would oblige God to recompense them for their performances. The individual who did much was to expect reward from God, while every transgression entailed its corresponding recompense for evil. What was not repaid in this life would be a part of a future reward.<\/p>\n<p>Reward was a significant part of Jesus’ teaching, especially in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5–7). The Beatitudes proclaimed that the blessing of God would come upon all people who exhibited certain moral characteristics (Mt 5:1-12). The individual who acts to receive the praise of others shall receive that and nothing more, but the one whose motives call him to please God shall be rewarded by God (6:1, 4, 6, 18). However, Jesus sharply curbed this idea when he taught the parable of the laborers (20:1-16). Here each was paid the same amount no matter how long he had worked. Jesus calls us to work for motives higher than reward. In the discourse on the good shepherd, the hireling who only works for wages is contrasted with the shepherd who is willing to lay down his life for the sheep (Jn 10:11-14). The servant who had only done his duty deserves no reward (Lk 17:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Paul, the idea of reward, especially as it relates to salvation, is seen in a drastically different light. No longer is salvation considered to be the result of an individual having done more good than evil in life. Salvation is an act of divine favor that no one can earn (Rom 4:4-5). Salvation is not earned but given by a loving, beneficent God. The idea of reward does not disappear. Reward results from good done after salvation is attained. First Corinthians 3:8-14 teaches that the quality of a person’s works will be examined and rewarded but that salvation does not hinge upon good works. However, works do have an important place in one’s eternal destiny (Col 3:24; Rv 14:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crown; Judgment.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REWARD<\/h3>\n<p>Recompense for good or evil; most often it suggests a benefit for favorable compensation. Both good and evil are rewarded or punished, and man’s responsibility and accountability are involved in an ethical sense. Related terms such as “wages,” “hire,” “recompense,” or “requital” are a part of the broader concept. In this fullest sense, the operation of reward ranges from the consequences resulting from dealings between people to God’s compensation for obedience or disobedience, from the consequences of actions felt in this life to divine recompense in the life to come.<\/p>\n<p>To Greek and Hebrew minds, the concept of reward suggested the ideal of the wholeness of an action, the completion of a deed. Just as work was completed for a man in the payment of wages, so it was assumed that an action naturally carried certain results, either reward or punishment. The overtones of commercial transactions were not absent, as when the reward is referred to as “wages.” Thus Paul says, “The wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23). The idea involves an equal return commensurate with the action performed.<\/p>\n<p>The biblical conception of reward was both ethical and religious. The covenant of God made with Israel was evidence of God’s loving favor; it promised good things to Israel on the condition of their obedience to God’s commands. Disobedience was a violation of the covenant and would bring disaster and death. Deuteronomy 28 spells out the blessings that obedience would bring and also the national disasters that would come upon Israel if they did not observe what was right and good in the sight of the Lord (see also Lv 26). In the period of the wilderness wanderings, failure to obey on the part of the people and their leaders brought suffering and death. The history of the judges and the kings was written in terms of reward for faithfulness and punishment for sin and idolatry. Earthly victory and the national welfare depended on obedience and faithfulness to the Lord (Jos 1:7-9; cf. Jgs 2).<\/p>\n<p>The pattern of reward and punishment was not always carried out. The Jews believed that God would be a merciful, forgiving God. Forgiveness involved the removal of the punishment for sin. “He does not deal with us according to our sins, nor requite us according to our iniquities” (Ps 103:10, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>The writer of Ecclesiastes found that life did not work out so neatly and that the doctrine of retribution did not always apply in the span of an individual life. There is a somewhat cynical note when the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper. Job’s friends take the position that his sickness is the result of some hidden sin. Job maintains his integrity, and for him the answer lies outside the pattern of strict reward for righteousness and punishment for evil. In the outcome Job is rewarded for his good life.<\/p>\n<p>In Jesus’ day Judaism had changed significantly. The legal system of the judges had been replaced with Roman law. But Judaism had no hesitation about recognizing the merit of good works and exhorting people to accumulate a store of merit on a basis of which God would bless them (Tb 4:7-10; Ecclus 51:30). The Pharisees believed that accurate and conscientious observance of the law would oblige God to recompense them for their performances. The individual who did much was to expect reward from God, while every transgression entailed its corresponding recompense for evil. What was not repaid in this life would be a part of a future reward.<\/p>\n<p>Reward was a significant part of Jesus’ teaching, especially in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5–7). The Beatitudes proclaimed that the blessing of God would come upon all people who exhibited certain moral characteristics (Mt 5:1-12). The individual who acts to receive the praise of others shall receive that and nothing more, but the one whose motives call him to please God shall be rewarded by God (6:1, 4, 6, 18). However, Jesus sharply curbed this idea when he taught the parable of the laborers (20:1-16). Here each was paid the same amount no matter how long he had worked. Jesus calls us to work for motives higher than reward. In the discourse on the good shepherd, the hireling who only works for wages is contrasted with the shepherd who is willing to lay down his life for the sheep (Jn 10:11-14). The servant who had only done his duty deserves no reward (Lk 17:9-10).<\/p>\n<p>Beginning with Paul, the idea of reward, especially as it relates to salvation, is seen in a drastically different light. No longer is salvation considered to be the result of an individual having done more good than evil in life. Salvation is an act of divine favor that no one can earn (Rom 4:4-5). Salvation is not earned but given by a loving, beneficent God. The idea of reward does not disappear. Reward results from good done after salvation is attained. First Corinthians 3:8-14 teaches that the quality of a person’s works will be examined and rewarded but that salvation does not hinge upon good works. However, works do have an important place in one’s eternal destiny (Col 3:24; Rv 14:13).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Crown; Judgment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REWARD Recompense for good or evil; most often it suggests a benefit for favorable compensation. Both good and evil are rewarded or punished, and man’s responsibility and accountability are involved in an ethical sense. Related terms such as “wages,” “hire,” “recompense,” or “requital” are a part of the broader concept. In this fullest sense, the operation of reward ranges from the consequences resulting from dealings between people to God’s compensation for obedience or disobedience, from th...","summary_en":"REWARD Recompense for good or evil; most often it suggests a benefit for favorable compensation. Both good and evil are rewarded or punished, and man’s responsibility and accountability are involved in an ethical sense. Related terms such as “wages,” “hire,” “recompense,” or “requital” are a part of the broader concept. In this fullest sense, the operation of reward ranges from the consequences resulting from dealings between people to God’s compensation for obedience or disobedience, from th...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38015,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Vineyard Vines","title_en":"Vineyard Vines","content_ro":"<h3>VINES, VINEYARD<\/h3>\n<p>Plants cultivated for the production of grapes, raisins, and wine. The grapevine is mentioned frequently in Scripture both in a literal and a figurative sense. Probably originating in the Ararat region (Gn 9:20), the vine was also cultivated in ancient Egypt, where tomb murals depict the wine-making process. The Canaanites provided wine for Abraham (14:18), and Moses described the vineyards in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11). Excellent grapes from the valleys and plains (Nm 13:20, 24; Jgs 14:5; 15:5) provided fruit and wine to enhance the bland diet of the Hebrews. Wine was traded extensively in the late monarchy (cf. Ez 27:18), as well as in the Greek and Roman periods. For the Hebrews, an ideal picture of life was a sedentary one in which a man could remain peacefully in one place, cultivating his plot of land, and sitting under his vine (1 Kgs 4:25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The typical vineyard was surrounded by a protective hedge or fence, and at harvesttime a watchtower was manned to guard the crop from thieves (Jb 24:18; Is 1:8; Mk 12:1). The vines were planted in rows within the enclosed area, and as the plants grew, the tendrils were trained along supports to raise the fruit-bearing branches off the ground (Ez 17:6). The vines were pruned and tended by vinedressers (Lv 25:3; Is 61:5; Jl 3:10; Jn 15:2). At harvesttime the mature fruit was picked and taken to the winepresses (Hos 9:2). A festive atmosphere accompanied the treading of the grapes (Is 16:10; Jer 25:30), and the fermenting juice was collected in new goatskin bags (Mt 9:17) or large pottery jars.<\/p>\n<p>People working in the grape harvest were exempted from military service, which attests to its importance. Taxes and debts were often discharged by payments of wine, and the law provided for the poor to glean in the vineyards as in the wheat fields (Lv 19:9-10). Nonproductive vines were used for producing charcoal (Ez 15:4; Jn 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Christ frequently used the vineyard as a background for his parables (Mt 20:1-16; 21:28-43; Mk 12:1-11; Lk 13:6-9; 20:9-18). Wine-making methods were commonly known and understood, so that an allegory of placing new wine in old wineskins (Mt 9:17) was immediately familiar and significant. In a symbolic sense, Christ described himself as the true vine (Jn 15:1-11), and his blood became the sacramental wine of communion.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Plants (Vine).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>VINES, VINEYARD<\/h3>\n<p>Plants cultivated for the production of grapes, raisins, and wine. The grapevine is mentioned frequently in Scripture both in a literal and a figurative sense. Probably originating in the Ararat region (Gn 9:20), the vine was also cultivated in ancient Egypt, where tomb murals depict the wine-making process. The Canaanites provided wine for Abraham (14:18), and Moses described the vineyards in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11). Excellent grapes from the valleys and plains (Nm 13:20, 24; Jgs 14:5; 15:5) provided fruit and wine to enhance the bland diet of the Hebrews. Wine was traded extensively in the late monarchy (cf. Ez 27:18), as well as in the Greek and Roman periods. For the Hebrews, an ideal picture of life was a sedentary one in which a man could remain peacefully in one place, cultivating his plot of land, and sitting under his vine (1 Kgs 4:25).<\/p>\n\n<p>The typical vineyard was surrounded by a protective hedge or fence, and at harvesttime a watchtower was manned to guard the crop from thieves (Jb 24:18; Is 1:8; Mk 12:1). The vines were planted in rows within the enclosed area, and as the plants grew, the tendrils were trained along supports to raise the fruit-bearing branches off the ground (Ez 17:6). The vines were pruned and tended by vinedressers (Lv 25:3; Is 61:5; Jl 3:10; Jn 15:2). At harvesttime the mature fruit was picked and taken to the winepresses (Hos 9:2). A festive atmosphere accompanied the treading of the grapes (Is 16:10; Jer 25:30), and the fermenting juice was collected in new goatskin bags (Mt 9:17) or large pottery jars.<\/p>\n<p>People working in the grape harvest were exempted from military service, which attests to its importance. Taxes and debts were often discharged by payments of wine, and the law provided for the poor to glean in the vineyards as in the wheat fields (Lv 19:9-10). Nonproductive vines were used for producing charcoal (Ez 15:4; Jn 15:6).<\/p>\n<p>Christ frequently used the vineyard as a background for his parables (Mt 20:1-16; 21:28-43; Mk 12:1-11; Lk 13:6-9; 20:9-18). Wine-making methods were commonly known and understood, so that an allegory of placing new wine in old wineskins (Mt 9:17) was immediately familiar and significant. In a symbolic sense, Christ described himself as the true vine (Jn 15:1-11), and his blood became the sacramental wine of communion.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Agriculture; Plants (Vine).<\/p>","summary_ro":"VINES, VINEYARD Plants cultivated for the production of grapes, raisins, and wine. The grapevine is mentioned frequently in Scripture both in a literal and a figurative sense. Probably originating in the Ararat region (Gn 9:20), the vine was also cultivated in ancient Egypt, where tomb murals depict the wine-making process. The Canaanites provided wine for Abraham (14:18), and Moses described the vineyards in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11). Excellent grapes from the valleys and plains (Nm 13:20,...","summary_en":"VINES, VINEYARD Plants cultivated for the production of grapes, raisins, and wine. The grapevine is mentioned frequently in Scripture both in a literal and a figurative sense. Probably originating in the Ararat region (Gn 9:20), the vine was also cultivated in ancient Egypt, where tomb murals depict the wine-making process. The Canaanites provided wine for Abraham (14:18), and Moses described the vineyards in the Promised Land (Dt 6:11). Excellent grapes from the valleys and plains (Nm 13:20,...","source":"Articles\/V.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54881,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","summary_en":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82507,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","summary_en":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110133,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","summary_en":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137759,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:1","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:1-16<\/strong> This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","summary_en":"20:1-16 This parable is similar to the parable of the Lost Son (Luke 15:11-32). In both, God’s grace is shown to two parties while one grumbles about unjust treatment.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61942,"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":89568,"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":117194,"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":144820,"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}],"2":[{"id":7008,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Coins","title_en":"Coins","content_ro":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>COINS<\/h3>\n<p>Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century <span>BC<\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>• Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>• Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"EarliestCoinsinPalestine\">Earliest Coins in Palestine<\/p>\n<p>Not until the time of Darius the Great (Darius I of Persia, 521–486 <span>BC<\/span>) did an official government-sponsored coinage become current in Palestine. Those earliest coins were oval-shaped gold darics, along with some silver coins.<\/p>\n<p>“Dram” is another term for the Persian gold daric. It is mentioned in Ezra 2:68-69 (<span>kjv<\/span>), where Zerubbabel’s caravan offered gold darics amounting to $30,000 toward rebuilding the temple. This passage is the first mention of an actual coin in the Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Almost at the same time that the Persian coins became current in Palestine, the widely popular silver tetradrachmas (four-drachma pieces) of Athens began to find their way to the mercantile centers of the Phoenician, Israelite, and Philistine coasts. Archaeologists have unearthed them in hoards throughout the eastern Mediterranean region. They continued to be used through the Persian period, which lasted until the Persian Empire was conquered by Alexander the Great in 334–330 <span>BC<\/span>. The coin was thick and heavy in appearance, but being of high-quality silver, it was in great demand for international commerce. Presumably Greek merchants found they could obtain the most desirable Asiatic imports in exchange for that particular form of currency.<\/p>\n<p>The silver didrachma, or half-drachma, in general use in the Greek Empire from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>, continued through Roman times. After Alexander’s conquests, of course, Greek coins were used throughout the Macedonian Empire from present-day Yugoslavia to Pakistan. They were almost certainly employed for business purposes in Judea, for example.<\/p>\n<p>The shekels of the Phoenician trade centers of Tyre and Sidon, which had contributed substantially to the money supply in the Persian period, continued to be accepted in Judea even after the Alexandrian conquest. Typical of Sidon was a silver shekel portraying the battlements and walls of Sidon’s harbor, with a ship lying at anchor and two prancing lions in the foreground. A typical Tyrian shekel showed the god Baal robed and wearing a tiara. He was riding a hippocamp (winged horse with the tail of a fish) on the sea, with a fish or dolphin beneath. The reverse showed an Egyptian-type owl facing right, plus a shepherd’s crook and flail, both royal insignia in Egypt. The stater (or tetradrachma) found by the disciple Peter in a fish’s mouth and used to pay the temple tax for himself and Jesus may have been a Tyrian coin (Mt 17:27; <span>rsv<\/span> “shekel”).<\/p>\n<p>The talent, which represented a certain weight of gold or silver, was a common medium of exchange before the development of coinage. During the Maccabean period, John Hyrcanus saved the city of Jerusalem from destruction in 133 <span>BC<\/span> by paying a ransom from a 900-year-old hoard stored in David’s sepulcher. Three thousand talents of silver were sent to the Seleucid king Antiochus VII Sidetes in return for his promise to withdraw his troops. Treasure plundered from the temple by the Romans in <span>AD<\/span> 66 is recorded as amounting to 17 talents. In gold talents that sum would represent the equivalent of the purchase price of about 15 large houses in a modern Western city.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CoinagefromtheMaccabeestoHerodAgrippaI\">Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I<\/p>\n<p>Even though a native Jewish dynasty assumed the government of the Holy Land, it was many years before any indigenous Jewish coinage was minted. Presumably the inhabitants continued to use the coinage of Tyre and Egypt and of the Seleucid Empire for their commercial transactions. It was formerly supposed that silver shekels bearing images of the chalice and pomegranate cluster dated from the reign of Simon Maccabeus (142–134 <span>BC<\/span>); more recent archaeological discoveries prove that those coins date from the first Jewish revolt (<span>AD<\/span> 66–70).<\/p>\n<p>When the time came to issue the first Jewish coins, the die makers faced several problems. No mint was available, and no local people were skilled in design or die sinking. Coins current in the Near East at that time, which showed a high degree of design and craftsmanship, each bore the portrait head of a ruler or a god. For the Jews to make such coins would have meant contravening the second commandment, “You shall not make for yourself a graven image” (Ex 20:4, <span>rsv<\/span>). Not until well into Roman times was a coin struck in Palestine bearing a portrait head of a Roman emperor.<\/p>\n<p>The earliest coinage of the Hasmonean dynasty (the regnal name of the Maccabees) was the small bronze lepton (plural, lepta) of John Hyrcanus I (134–104 <span>BC<\/span>), son of Simon Maccabeus. The obverse showed two cornucopias with a pomegranate between them. That image symbolized the fertility that God had granted to the land. The reverse contained an inscription within a wreath, “John the high priest and the community of the Jews.” Small bronze lepta from the reign of Alexander Janneus, son of Hyrcanus I, have been found in great numbers. They were evidently much in demand for transactions at the temple, where money changers converted the gentile currency of visiting worshipers into the more acceptable Jewish money. Undoubtedly Hasmonean lepta were the coins Jesus scattered over the pavement of the Court of the Gentiles when he overturned the tables of the money changers (Mt 21:12; Jn 2:15). The lepton, or “mite,” of bronze or copper, worth <span>1<\/span>\/<span>400<\/span> of a shekel, was mentioned by Jesus on another occasion. He praised a widow’s gift of two mites to the temple treasury with the comment that the rich “contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, her whole living” (Mk 12:44, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>Herod I came to power in Judea under the patronage of Mark Antony and secured the allegiance of the pro-Hasmonean Jews by marrying Mariamne, granddaughter of Hyrcanus II, in 38 <span>BC<\/span>. Herod was empowered to strike his own bronze coins. Although he had a free hand to introduce innovations, Herod’s lepta followed tradition quite faithfully. The lepta carried an anchor with letters meaning “Of King Herod.” The reverse bore the double cornucopias with a pomegranate (or poppy) between them. Herod also minted a large bronze coin with what appears to be a Macedonian helmet on the obverse and a slender tripod on the reverse, along with an inscription of Herod’s name. Other designs he employed included wheat, eagles, and wreaths. He issued no silver coinage, relying instead on the available supplies of silver coins from Tyre, Syria, Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome.<\/p>\n<p>After Herod’s death in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, his son Herod Archelaus assumed control. Lepta from that period bore a hanging cluster of grapes with a Greek inscription, and on the reverse a two-plumed Macedonian helmet. Grapes were an allusion to Israel as the Lord’s vine (Is 5).<\/p>\n<p>When Herod Antipas began his rule, also in 4 <span>BC<\/span>, he had no authority in Judea or Samaria. That portion of the former Jewish kingdom was placed under the control of Roman governors, or procurators, appointed directly by the emperor himself. Most familiar of the Roman procurators of Judea was Pontius Pilate (<span>AD<\/span> 26–36). His bronze coinage showed some bold innovations; his designs included representations of instruments used in the Roman religion such as the augur’s wand (resembling a shepherd’s crook in shape) and a ladle used in connection with broth prepared at sacrifices. The reverse bore a wreath enclosing the regnal date of <span>AD<\/span> 30–31. The two lepta put into the temple treasury (Lk 21:2) could have been lepta issued by Pilate or his predecessor. More likely, however, they were the Hasmonean lepta of Hyrcanus or Janneus, which were free of any taint of pagan Roman influence.<\/p>\n<p>Herod Agrippa I (<span>AD<\/span> 37–44), grandson of Herod the Great, continued the family tradition of ingratiating himself with the Roman overlords. Many of Herod Agrippa’s lepta have been found, showing a conical tasseled umbrella (perhaps symbolizing his royal protection of the people of Palestine) plus a Greek inscription indicating his reign. The reverse showed a bound cluster of three wheat ears and bore the regnal year as the legend.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RomanCoinsinNewTestamentTimes\">Roman Coins in New Testament Times<\/p>\n<p>The Roman “as” came into circulation about 348 <span>BC<\/span> as a bronze coin bearing the figure of an animal. The coin was named after the Roman one-pound weight, equivalent to 12 ounces (340 grams) in our modern system. At the time of Christ’s birth, the Roman “as” minted for use in the Asiatic provinces bore the head of the emperor Augustus, with a laurel wreath on the reverse. A smaller bronze quadrans, or quarter “as,” was also minted by the Romans.<\/p>\n<p>Another bronze coin found in Greek and Roman currency was the assarion, first minted in the first century <span>BC<\/span> but still in use in the Christian period. One type was stamped with a winged sphinx, with an amphora on the reverse. It is still debated whether the coin described as a “farthing” in the <span>kjv<\/span> was in fact a Greek assarion or a Roman “as” or quadrans. The coin is mentioned four times in the NT, most familiarly in the question “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?” (see Mt 5:26; 10:29; Mk 12:42; Lk 12:6, <span>rsv<\/span> “penny”). There is no doubt that the <span>kjv<\/span> translators decided to make the coin seem more familiar to their readers by using the name of the smallest copper coin in circulation in England at that time.<\/p>\n<p>The word translated “penny” in the <span>kjv<\/span> is the Greek form of “denarius,” the normal daily wage for a laborer in NT times. In the parable of the laborers in the vineyard, for example, the master agreed to pay each man “a penny” for his day’s work (Mt 20:2, <span>kjv<\/span>; <span>rsv<\/span> “a denarius”). “Two pence” was the amount paid to the innkeeper by the good Samaritan (Lk 10:35, <span>kjv<\/span>). Because of the influence of the Roman denarius on British currency, the English penny has always been represented by the initial letter of its Roman equivalent.<\/p>\n<p>When the denarius, or “penny,” is recognized as a normal day’s wage, the astonishment of Jesus’ disciples when they were expected to find food for 5,000 people is better understood. They exclaimed that “two hundred pennyworth” of food would not feed such a crowd (Jn 6:7, <span>kjv<\/span>); that sum represented more than six months’ work.<\/p>\n<p>As might be expected, the silver and gold coinage current in Palestine during the time of Christ and for the remainder of the first century <span>AD<\/span> came primarily from Rome. The larger silver coins, however, that are referred to as tetradrachmas or staters in the NT came from Egypt, Phoenicia, or Antioch. The silver coin most frequently mentioned in the NT was the Roman denarius or the Greek drachma. Since few drachmas have been found in excavations dating from the first century, it is possible that the term was used in popular speech to refer to the denarius (plural, denarii), which was approximately the same size as the average Greek drachma. Actually, few Greek cities were permitted by their Roman overlords to continue minting drachmas.<\/p>\n<p>Caesar Augustus issued a decree for all the Roman world to be enrolled (Lk 2:1-2) in an empire-wide census just about the time that Jesus was born (6 or 5 <span>BC<\/span>). During his long reign (27 <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 14), Augustus authorized a large variety of denarii. They generally carried his likeness on their obverse with the inscription “Augustus, son of the divine one” (that is, son of Julius Caesar, who had been voted divine honors by the Roman Senate).<\/p>\n<p>In Matthew 22:19 Jesus asked those trying to trick him with a question to show him a coin used to pay the government tax. They handed him a denarius bearing the portrait and inscription of Caesar (Mt 22:21). That coin could have been a denarius of Augustus, who had died some 16 years before, or of Tiberius (<span>AD<\/span> 14–37), who was then on the throne. The silver denarius of Tiberius read “Tiberius Caesar Augustus, son of the divine Augustus.” The reverse showed the high priestess of the vestal order, flaming torch in hand, seated on her throne facing right. The title “pontif(ex) maxim(us)” referred to Tiberius rather than to the priestess.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Minerals and Metals; Money; Money Changer.<\/p>","summary_ro":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","summary_en":"COINS Pieces of metal used and accepted as a medium of exchange. A coin has a specific weight and bears some type of authentication to make it easily recognizable. The word “coin” originally referred to a wedge-shaped die or stamp used to “strike” the metal blank. The first coins may have been minted in the late eighth century BC. Preview • Earliest Coins in Palestine • Coinage from the Maccabees to Herod Agrippa I • Roman Coins in New Testament Times Earliest Coins in Palestine Not until the...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":29480,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Penny","title_en":"Penny","content_ro":"<h3>PENNY<\/h3>\n<li>1. KJV translation of denarius (Mt 20:2, 9-10, 13; 22:19; Mk 12:15; Lk 20:24; Rv 6:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. The <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span> translation of the Roman assarion, equivalent to one-sixteenth of the denarius (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6).<\/li>\n<li>3. The <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span> translation of the Roman quadrans, equivalent to one-fourth of the assarion or one sixty-fourth of the denarius (Mt 5:26; Mk 12:42).<\/li>\n<li><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/li>","content_en":"<h3>PENNY<\/h3>\n<li>1. KJV translation of denarius (Mt 20:2, 9-10, 13; 22:19; Mk 12:15; Lk 20:24; Rv 6:6).<\/li>\n<li>2. The <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span> translation of the Roman assarion, equivalent to one-sixteenth of the denarius (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6).<\/li>\n<li>3. The <span>rsv<\/span> and <span>nlt<\/span> translation of the Roman quadrans, equivalent to one-fourth of the assarion or one sixty-fourth of the denarius (Mt 5:26; Mk 12:42).<\/li>\n<li><em>See also<\/em> Coins; Money.<\/li>","summary_ro":"PENNY 1. KJV translation of denarius (Mt 20:2, 9-10, 13; 22:19; Mk 12:15; Lk 20:24; Rv 6:6). 2. The rsv and nlt translation of the Roman assarion, equivalent to one-sixteenth of the denarius (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). 3. The rsv and nlt translation of the Roman quadrans, equivalent to one-fourth of the assarion or one sixty-fourth of the denarius (Mt 5:26; Mk 12:42). See also Coins; Money.","summary_en":"PENNY 1. KJV translation of denarius (Mt 20:2, 9-10, 13; 22:19; Mk 12:15; Lk 20:24; Rv 6:6). 2. The rsv and nlt translation of the Roman assarion, equivalent to one-sixteenth of the denarius (Mt 10:29; Lk 12:6). 3. The rsv and nlt translation of the Roman quadrans, equivalent to one-fourth of the assarion or one sixty-fourth of the denarius (Mt 5:26; Mk 12:42). See also Coins; Money.","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":38095,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wages","title_en":"Wages","content_ro":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","summary_en":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"3":[{"id":24430,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Marketplace Market","title_en":"Marketplace Market","content_ro":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MARKET, MARKETPLACE<\/h3>\n<p>Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey.<\/p>\n<p>The marketplace of NT times known as the <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">agora<\/span> was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurred (Mk 6:56); the center of public life and debate (Acts 17:17); and a place where trials were held (16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","summary_en":"MARKET, MARKETPLACE Place for the buying and selling of goods in antiquity. Generally, the marketplaces of the ancient Near East would be much like the open air bazaars one can still see in any city throughout Israel, Greece, and Turkey. The marketplace of NT times known as the agora was a place for buying and selling goods (Mk 7:4); a place for children to play (Mt 11:16; Lk 7:32); a place for idlers and for men seeking work (Mt 20:3); a place where public events, including healings, occurre...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":38096,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Wages","title_en":"Wages","content_ro":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>WAGES<\/h3>\n<p>Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in capturing the city of Tyre (Ez 29:18-20).<\/p>\n<p>Usually wages were agreed upon by employer and employee (Gn 29:15-19; Mt 20:2), but sometimes the pay was at the discretion of the employer (Mt 20:4). A fair wage for honest work is a biblical principle (Lk 10:7; 1 Tm 5:18). The Lord established laws to cover this principle and judged those who violated it. Wages were to be paid promptly (Lv 19:13); the holding back of wages is condemned in the Scripture (Mal 3:5; Jas 5:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>Wages were often a source of discontent and dispute between employer and employee. When soldiers came to John the Baptist to be baptized and asked about their future conduct, he urged them to be content with their wages (Lk 3:14). Jacob and Laban had disagreements about wages and twice Jacob complained, “You have changed my wages ten times” (Gn 31:7, 41).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible also speaks of ill-gotten wages. The wages of a prostitute could not be brought into the house of the Lord (Dt 23:18), and people are warned against the error of Balaam, who corrupted Israel because he “loved the wages of unrighteousness” (2 Pt 2:15).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Money; Banker, Banking; Poor, The; Riches; Work.<\/p>","summary_ro":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","summary_en":"WAGES Payment received by a laborer in return for his work. Usually wages are calculated in terms of a medium of exchange, such as money, but they can be paid in any kind of goods or services. Jacob worked seven years in return for Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel (Gn 29:18-20), and then had to work another seven years when Laban did not honor his agreement. Later, Jacob’s wages were sheep and goats (30:31-32; 31:8). Nebuchadnezzar was given the country of Egypt as wages for his work in captu...","source":"Articles\/W.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"8":[{"id":54882,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","summary_en":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82508,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","summary_en":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110134,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","summary_en":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137760,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:8","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:8","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:8<\/strong> Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","summary_en":"20:8 Payment followed the day’s work (Deut 24:14-15).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":40069,"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":54883,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","summary_en":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82509,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","summary_en":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110135,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","summary_en":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137761,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:16","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:16<\/strong> See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","summary_en":"20:16 See Matt 5:19; 8:11-12.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":24799,"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":29705,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Persecution","title_en":"Persecution","content_ro":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>PERSECUTION<\/h3>\n<p>Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-treatment of Israel in Egypt, like her later oppression by the Philistines, Midianites, and others, had economic and political grounds. For those refusing to accept the royal policy of syncretism, official tolerance of injustice, and pagan immoralities, persecution becomes frequent—from Elijah’s period onward (1 Kgs 19:10). Later prophets, as spokesmen of uncompromising truth and the claims of divine law in the face of social evils, suffered severely at the hands of the ruling classes, so that persecution became, in Jewish eyes, the hallmark of the true prophet (2 Chr 36:15-16; Mt 5:12; 23:29-37; Acts 7:52; Heb 11:32-38).<\/p>\n<p>Daniel’s stories illustrate persecution during the exile. On the return under foreign rule, strict Jews sought to preserve the nation’s identity and religion amid alien pressures and the compromises of lax Jews anxious for accommodation and prosperity (1 Macc 1:11-15; 2:42-48). The result was the social oppression and harassment that made the repeated pleas for vindication and divine intervention, in such psalms as 10, 69, 140, and 149, painfully relevant in postexilic worship. This persecution reached a horrifying climax of cruelty during the Maccabean age, provoking armed resistance in response (2 Macc 6–7; Heb 11:35-38).<\/p>\n<p>Thus, despite her confidence in God’s sovereignty and “protection,” Israel learned that right does not always prosper in this world, that faithfulness to truth does not ensure immunity from suffering, sacrifice, or martyrdom.<\/p>\n<p>This acceptance of the high cost of righteousness was inherited by Christianity. Jesus repeatedly warned of persecution, even within households, and urged “armed” preparation for it, promising the Spirit’s assistance at judicial examinations (Mt 5:11-12; 10:16-23, 34-36; 23:34; Lk 6:26; 22:35-36). Jesus was deeply angered by the murder of John the Baptist by Herod (Lk 23:9), and he foresaw his own fate. Because he criticized the legalism and nationalism of the Pharisees, and the compromises of the Sadducees to protect their own privileges (Jn 11:47-50), and because he disappointed the militaristic hopes set upon the Messiah by the common people, Jesus knew he would be rejected. His call to discipleship came to include warnings of danger, reviling, slander, accusation, flogging, arraignment before courts, hatred, and death. He frankly invited followers to prepare for his crucifixion, as the only way to life and the kingdom (Mt 16:21-26; 20:17-22; Mk 10:29-30; Jn 15:18-25; 16:1-4). Jesus was killed on the charges of subverting the nation, forbidding payment of taxes to the Romans, and claiming to be king (Lk 23:2).<\/p>\n<p>The first persecution of the church by Jewish authorities was provoked mainly by Peter’s accusations concerning the murder of the Messiah. As apostolic influence increased, official action came to include imprisonment and beating (Acts 5:17, 40). The powerful advocacy of the Hellenist Stephen provoked a Jewish mob to stone him (Acts 6–7)—the signal for “a great persecution,” scattering most Christians from Jerusalem. The conversion of the archpersecutor Saul of Tarsus marked a resounding victory over opposition, and Herod’s sudden death just after attacking the church “to please the Jews” was another (Acts 12:1-3, 20-24).<\/p>\n<p>As Christianity moved into the Gentile world, a new cause of Jewish persecution arose as disturbances began to occur in the synagogues (Acts 13:44-45, 50; 14:1-6, 19; 17:1, 5, 13; 18:4-6, 12). In addition, the healing of the slave girl at Philippi led to the disciples’ imprisonment (16:19-24); at Ephesus, the effect of Christian preaching on the trade of idol makers occasioned a dangerous threat, which the authorities averted (19:23-41). Paul averted the plot of more than 40 men who vowed to ambush him and kill him (21:4-36; 23:12-15). And the book of Acts closes with Paul awaiting trial before Caesar (28:30-31).<\/p>\n<p>Throughout this period, persecution of Christians was sporadic, local, and mainly Jewish, provoked by envy of the church’s missionary success. Officially, Christianity, as a Jewish sect (Acts 24:5, 14), shared the state’s legal recognition won by the Jews. Thus, Paul received Roman protection at Paphos, Philippi, Corinth, Ephesus, and Jerusalem from governors Felix and Festus and their adviser Herod Agrippa, as well as from the centurion conveying him to Rome. This explains Paul’s confident appeal to Caesar; an imperial acquittal would ensure Christianity freedom from harassment throughout the empire.<\/p>\n<p>Paul’s attitude to persecution included regretful remembrance of his own persecuting days (Acts 22:4; 26:9-11; Gal 1:22-24), deliberate acceptance of risks in obedience to Christ (Acts 20:22-24; 21:13), continual warning that tribulation is inseparable from discipleship (Acts 14:22; Rom 5:3; 12:12; 1 Thes 3:4), and assurance that in every form of tribulation Christians are more than conquerors (Rom 8:35-37).<\/p>\n<p>Almost certainly, Paul was beheaded during fierce persecution at Rome following the fire for which the Christians were blamed. Christians were often accused of “atheism” (rejecting polytheism), of appealing only to slave classes, of “scandalous” love feasts, and unsociable, austere behavior (cf. Jn 15:19), making them a popular target for blame.<\/p>\n<p>About this time, Peter warned Christians in the East of the danger confronting the church. For a little while, “various trials” only prove the genuineness of faith (1 Pt 1:6). Slander should be answered by blameless living. Honor should be paid to the authorities. Suffering for righteousness should be accepted without fear. Let Christians prepare respectful defenses, with consciences clear of blame. If they suffer for doing right, remember that Christ did too—for them. Thus they must “arm” themselves for suffering (4:1), and not be surprised at persecution as “something strange” (v 12). They are sharing Christ’s sufferings. His final word is “Stand fast!”<\/p>\n<p>Mark, too, is thought to have written at this time for the benefit of the suffering Roman church. His Gospel dwells upon Christ’s conflict, its causes and forms, and vividly portrays Christ’s own heroic death. Like Peter, Mark meets persecution by pointing back to the suffering Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Somewhat later, Christianity was exposed as an “illegal religion,” no longer a protected sect of Judaism, by the introduction into synagogue services of a prayer against “Nazarenes,” which Christians could not offer. Thereafter, the church was liable to official suppression. Rome readily incorporated old, national religions into state rituals for the sake of imperial unity, but she resisted new, nonconformist movements, especially those with secret meetings (i.e., the Eucharist), as politically dangerous (cf. Acts 17:6-7).<\/p>\n<p>Toward the end of the century, faced with a growing church and political unrest, the state required public “worship” of “the genius of Rome” alongside any other religious rites. In Domitian’s reign (<span>AD<\/span> 81–96) this became worship of the living emperor, with elaborate temples and an official priesthood. When Christians refused, acknowledging Jesus alone as divine Lord, official, and increasingly barbaric, persecution began. It is probable that Revelation reflects this situation (Rv 1:9; 2:13; 6:9; 13; 19:2). So the Bible ends as it began, with the theme of the persecution of the people of God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Suffering; Tribulation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","summary_en":"PERSECUTION Infliction of suffering, injury, or death on others because of their identity or beliefs. The Bible begins with an account of the persecution of the righteous by the unrighteous (Gn 4:3-7, “regard for Abel”; Mt 23:35; Heb 11:4). The Wisdom of Solomon (Wisd of Sol 2:12-20) dramatically illustrates the envy and guilt that prompt such persecution. Lot’s experience, likewise, illustrates the suffering involved in refusing to conform to popular behavior (Gn 19:9; 2 Pt 2:7-8). The ill-t...","source":"Articles\/P.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":35861,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64961,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65151,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92587,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92777,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120213,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120403,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147839,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148029,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","title_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected","content_ro":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Stone the Builders Rejected<\/h3>\n<p>Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leaders (Matt 11:2-19; 14:3-12). Jesus was evasive in his dialogues (e.g., Matt 13:10-15; 17:24-27; 19:3-12; 21:23-27), he refused to produce signs proving his messianic claims (12:38-42; 16:1-4), and he was accompanied by outcasts of society (9:9-13; 11:16-19). He offended Jewish sensibilities, disregarded Jewish traditions (5:17-20; 9:14-17; 12:1-14; 15:1-20; 21:12-13), and purposefully avoided recognition (8:4; 12:15-21). His revelations were reserved for the unlikely (11:25-27; 13:16-17; 16:13-20), and he often spoke of his own humiliating death (16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:2). Jesus did not come with the flash and spark of someone in need of attention, nor did he make his status and calling glowingly obvious. Instead, he chose the path of humility, privacy, and revelation recognized by faith.<\/p>\n<p>In the end, Jesus was vindicated: He won arguments (Luke 20:20-40), exorcized demons (Matt 8:28-34), healed wondrously (Matt 9:1-8), raised people from the dead (Matt 9:18-26), and ultimately rose from the dead himself (Matt 28:1-10). His divisive but effective ministry inaugurated God’s Kingdom (Matt 11:2-6).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 3:8; 8:14-15; 28:12-13; 59:9-10; Jer 13:16; 20:11; 31:7-9; 50:31-32; Hos 4:4-6; 5:5; 14:9; Mal 2:7-9; Matt 11:5-6; 13:54-58; 17:27; 21:42-46; Mark 6:3; Luke 20:17-19; John 6:60-69; Rom 9:30-33; 11:7-12; 14:12-13, 20-21; 1 Cor 1:21-23; 8:9-13; 10:31–11:1; 2 Cor 6:3; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:5-8; 1 Jn 2:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","summary_en":"The Stone the Builders Rejected Jesus continually offended the Jewish leaders and those who followed them. Though he was born in David’s line, his mother’s reputation was tainted (Matt 1:18-25). Jesus himself was from Nazareth (Matt 2:23), a very unprestigious place (see Matt 13:53-58). His ministry was in Galilee, a backwater distant from official Judaism (see Matt 4:12-16). His closest associate was the inexplicable John, who baptized people and prophetically castigated the political leader...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":35866,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65248,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92874,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120500,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":148126,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus","title_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus","content_ro":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Resurrection of Jesus<\/h3>\n<p>Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused with a physical resurrection; and (4) the resurrection is a personal experience in the heart of faith, not an event in history. Behind such suggestions lies a deep-seated skepticism toward the supernatural, or at least toward whether a miraculous event could have happened. Such suggestions fail to take into account the fact that for New Testament authors and their audiences, the term <em>resurrection<\/em> could only have meant the literal reanimation of a dead corpse (see 1 Cor 15).<\/p>\n<p>The historicity of Jesus’ resurrection and the historical reliability of the biblical accounts are supported by (1) the evidence of an empty tomb; (2) the presence of women as witnesses (no one would have made up a story with women as witnesses, since the testimony of a woman was considered to be less reliable than that of a man); (3) the varied but basically unified accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances; (4) the transformation of the disciples from a fearful band into fearless followers; and (5) the disciples’ ability to overcome the scandal of following a crucified man (Deuteronomy 21:23 indicates that one who dies such a death has fallen under God’s curse). Judaism had no concept of a dying and rising Messiah that could conveniently be applied to Jesus. Inventing something no one would find conceivable would have made little sense. The most reasonable conclusion is just what the New Testament announces: that Jesus did, in fact, rise from the dead.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 16:21; 17:9, 23; 20:19; 26:32; 28:1-10; Mark 14:28; Luke 9:22; 14:14; John 2:19-22; 5:21; 6:39-40; 11:1-44; 14:20; 21:14; Acts 1:21-22; 2:22-36; 3:15, 26; 4:2, 10, 33; 5:30; 10:39-40; 13:29-31; 17:18, 32; 23:6-10; Rom 1:4; 4:24-25; 6:4-5, 9; 7:4; 8:11, 34; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:4, 12-23, 35, 42-44, 52; 2 Cor 1:9; 4:14; 5:15; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; 2:5-6; Phil 3:10-11; Col 2:12; 3:1; 1 Thes 1:10; 4:14; 2 Tim 2:8, 18; Heb 6:2; 11:35; 1 Pet 1:21; 3:18, 21; Rev 20:4-8, 11-15<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","summary_en":"The Resurrection of Jesus Scripture unanimously depicts the personal and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead by the power of God, but numerous other attempts to explain it have emerged: (1) Jesus never really died—instead, he lost consciousness and regained it after being laid in a cool tomb (the swoon theory); (2) the disciples of Jesus stole his body and then lied about a resurrection (see Matt 28:12-15); (3) the disciples had hallucinations and dreams that they mistakenly confused w...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":42362,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":42497,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69988,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":70123,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97614,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97749,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125240,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125375,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"John, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>John, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was younger. James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19). They fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:8-10). They were among the first whom Jesus called as disciples, and they left everything to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11; cp. John 1:35-40). Jesus named them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they were loud or short-tempered (see Luke 9:54). At one point, the two brothers evoked the indignation of the other disciples when they asked for special positions of privilege in the coming kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>John is understood to be the unnamed “disciple Jesus loved” and “another disciple” mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:20-24). He may have been the unnamed disciple of John the Baptist, who, together with Andrew, became an early follower of Jesus (John 1:35-40).<\/p>\n<p class=\"profile-body\" ts=\"profile-body 10\">John’s name occurs three times in Acts; each time he was working with Peter (Acts 3:1-11; 4:1-23; 8:14-25). Paul referred to him as one of the “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem (Gal 2:9).<\/p>\n<p>The most widespread tradition about John’s later life is that he moved to Ephesus, where he eventually became the bishop of Asia Minor, lived to an old age, and died peacefully in the company of friends. His Gospel provides a profound portrait of Jesus, and his letters provide a moving depiction of the Christian life (1–3 John).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2, 38; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 49, 54; John 13:23-25; 18:15-16; 19:26-27; 20:2-10; 21:2, 7, 20-24; Acts 1:13; 3:1-11; 4:1-22; 5:17-42; 8:14-25; Gal 2:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","summary_en":"John, Son of Zebedee John, brother of James and son of Zebedee, was one of the twelve apostles. Early tradition identifies him as the author of the Gospel of John, the Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. John and his brother James were among those closest to Jesus (Mark 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33). His mother, Salome, might have been a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). John’s name usually occurs after James’s, which suggests that John was...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":18397,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"James (Person)","title_en":"James (Person)","content_ro":"<h3>JAMES (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name.<\/li>\n<p>The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it with their views on the perpetual virginity of Mary. But there seems to be no good reason to challenge the fact from Scripture. As with the other brothers, James apparently did not accept Jesus’ authority during his earthly life (Jn 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is no specific mention of James’s conversion; it may have dated from Jesus’ appearance to him and the others after Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor 15:7). He became head of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal 2:9). Although Jesus had always taught the relative subordination of family ties (Mt 12:48-50; Mk 3:33-35; Lk 8:21), it is hard to believe that James’s authority was not somehow enhanced because of his relationship to the Master.<\/p>\n<p>James was regarded as an apostle (Gal 1:19), although he was not one of the Twelve. Some suggest he was a replacement for the martyred son of Zebedee; others infer his apostleship by widening the scope of that term to embrace both “the Twelve” and “all the apostles” (see the two separate categories cited in 1 Cor 15:5, 7).<\/p>\n<p>Tradition stated that James was appointed the first bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord himself as well as the apostles. What is certain is that he presided over the first Council of Jerusalem, called to consider the terms for admission of Gentiles into the Christian church, and he may have formulated the decree that met with the approval of all his colleagues and was sent to the churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (Acts 15:19-20). James evidently regarded his own special ministry as being to the Jews, and his was a mediating role in the controversy that arose in the young church around the place of the law for those who had become Christians, from both Gentile and Jewish origins.<\/p>\n<p>That he continued to have strong Jewish-Christian sympathies is apparent from the request made to Paul when the latter visited Jerusalem for the last time (Acts 21:18-25). This was also the last mention in Acts of James’s career. His name also occurs in the NT as the traditional author of the Epistle of James, where he describes himself as “a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Jas 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>According to Hegesippus (c. 180), James’s faithful adherence to the Jewish law and his austere lifestyle led to the designation “the Just.” It seems clear that James suffered martyrdom. Josephus places it in the year 61, when there was a Jewish uprising after the death of Festus the procurator and before his successor had been appointed.<\/p>\n<li>2. James, son of Alphaeus; one of the 12 apostles.<\/li>\n<p>James, son of Alphaeus, is always listed as one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), but nothing is known for certain about him. Levi (also known as Matthew) is also described as the son of Alphaeus (Mk 2:14), but it is improbable that he and James were brothers. Many scholars have identified him with the one called “James the less” or “James the smaller.” The description “the less” seems to have been given to distinguish him from the son of Zebedee, and it may signify that he was either smaller or younger than Zebedee’s son (the Greek word can cover both interpretations).<\/p>\n<li>3. James, son of Zebedee. One of the 12 apostles; the first of them to be martyred (<span>AD<\/span> 44).<\/li>\n<p>James was a Galilean fisherman whose circumstances we can suppose to have been comfortable (Mk 1:19-20) and who was called to be one of the disciples at the same time as his brother John (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20). It is reasonable to assume that he was older than John, both because he is nearly always mentioned first and because John is sometimes identified as “the brother of James” (Mt 10:2; 17:1; Mk 3:17; 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>James, John, and Simon Peter, who were part of a fishing partnership that included Andrew, Simon’s brother (Lk 5:10), were a trio who attained in some sense a place of primacy among the disciples. They are found at the center of things—for example, when Jairus’s daughter was raised (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51), at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28), on the Mount of Olives (Mk 13:3), and in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). It was James and John, moreover, who had earlier accompanied Jesus to the home of Simon and Andrew (Mk 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>James and John were given by Jesus the nickname Boanerges, or “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17), when they were rebuked by the Lord for impetuous speech and for having totally misconceived the purpose of his coming. This may have been the consequence of the suggestion made by them that they should pray for the destruction of the Samaritan village, the inhabitants of which had rejected the Lord’s messengers (Lk 9:54; cf. Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>The presumptuous and ill-considered thinking of the two brothers was obvious also when, after asking with his brother for a place of honor in the kingdom, James was corecipient of the prophecy that they would drink the cup their Master was to drink (Mk 10:35-40; cf. Mt 20:20-23). The two sons of Zebedee are also assumed to have been present with the other disciples when the risen Christ appeared by the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1), though curiously James’s name is nowhere mentioned in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>We know nothing about James’s career subsequently until about the year 44, when Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled: James was killed “by the sword” by Herod Agrippa I, and thus became the first of the Twelve whose martyrdom was referred to in the NT (Acts 12:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The wife of Zebedee was Salome (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:40), who may have been a sister of the Lord’s mother (Jn 19:25). If this were so, it would mean that James and John were first cousins of Jesus and that they may have considered themselves to have been in a privileged position.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JAMES (P<span>erson<\/span>)<\/h3>\n<li>1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name.<\/li>\n<p>The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it with their views on the perpetual virginity of Mary. But there seems to be no good reason to challenge the fact from Scripture. As with the other brothers, James apparently did not accept Jesus’ authority during his earthly life (Jn 7:5).<\/p>\n<p>There is no specific mention of James’s conversion; it may have dated from Jesus’ appearance to him and the others after Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor 15:7). He became head of the church at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18; Gal 2:9). Although Jesus had always taught the relative subordination of family ties (Mt 12:48-50; Mk 3:33-35; Lk 8:21), it is hard to believe that James’s authority was not somehow enhanced because of his relationship to the Master.<\/p>\n<p>James was regarded as an apostle (Gal 1:19), although he was not one of the Twelve. Some suggest he was a replacement for the martyred son of Zebedee; others infer his apostleship by widening the scope of that term to embrace both “the Twelve” and “all the apostles” (see the two separate categories cited in 1 Cor 15:5, 7).<\/p>\n<p>Tradition stated that James was appointed the first bishop of Jerusalem by the Lord himself as well as the apostles. What is certain is that he presided over the first Council of Jerusalem, called to consider the terms for admission of Gentiles into the Christian church, and he may have formulated the decree that met with the approval of all his colleagues and was sent to the churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia (Acts 15:19-20). James evidently regarded his own special ministry as being to the Jews, and his was a mediating role in the controversy that arose in the young church around the place of the law for those who had become Christians, from both Gentile and Jewish origins.<\/p>\n<p>That he continued to have strong Jewish-Christian sympathies is apparent from the request made to Paul when the latter visited Jerusalem for the last time (Acts 21:18-25). This was also the last mention in Acts of James’s career. His name also occurs in the NT as the traditional author of the Epistle of James, where he describes himself as “a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (Jas 1:1).<\/p>\n<p>According to Hegesippus (c. 180), James’s faithful adherence to the Jewish law and his austere lifestyle led to the designation “the Just.” It seems clear that James suffered martyrdom. Josephus places it in the year 61, when there was a Jewish uprising after the death of Festus the procurator and before his successor had been appointed.<\/p>\n<li>2. James, son of Alphaeus; one of the 12 apostles.<\/li>\n<p>James, son of Alphaeus, is always listed as one of the 12 apostles (Mt 10:3; Mk 3:18; Lk 6:15; Acts 1:13), but nothing is known for certain about him. Levi (also known as Matthew) is also described as the son of Alphaeus (Mk 2:14), but it is improbable that he and James were brothers. Many scholars have identified him with the one called “James the less” or “James the smaller.” The description “the less” seems to have been given to distinguish him from the son of Zebedee, and it may signify that he was either smaller or younger than Zebedee’s son (the Greek word can cover both interpretations).<\/p>\n<li>3. James, son of Zebedee. One of the 12 apostles; the first of them to be martyred (<span>AD<\/span> 44).<\/li>\n<p>James was a Galilean fisherman whose circumstances we can suppose to have been comfortable (Mk 1:19-20) and who was called to be one of the disciples at the same time as his brother John (Mt 4:21; Mk 1:19-20). It is reasonable to assume that he was older than John, both because he is nearly always mentioned first and because John is sometimes identified as “the brother of James” (Mt 10:2; 17:1; Mk 3:17; 5:37).<\/p>\n<p>James, John, and Simon Peter, who were part of a fishing partnership that included Andrew, Simon’s brother (Lk 5:10), were a trio who attained in some sense a place of primacy among the disciples. They are found at the center of things—for example, when Jairus’s daughter was raised (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51), at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28), on the Mount of Olives (Mk 13:3), and in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). It was James and John, moreover, who had earlier accompanied Jesus to the home of Simon and Andrew (Mk 1:29).<\/p>\n<p>James and John were given by Jesus the nickname Boanerges, or “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17), when they were rebuked by the Lord for impetuous speech and for having totally misconceived the purpose of his coming. This may have been the consequence of the suggestion made by them that they should pray for the destruction of the Samaritan village, the inhabitants of which had rejected the Lord’s messengers (Lk 9:54; cf. Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>The presumptuous and ill-considered thinking of the two brothers was obvious also when, after asking with his brother for a place of honor in the kingdom, James was corecipient of the prophecy that they would drink the cup their Master was to drink (Mk 10:35-40; cf. Mt 20:20-23). The two sons of Zebedee are also assumed to have been present with the other disciples when the risen Christ appeared by the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1), though curiously James’s name is nowhere mentioned in the fourth Gospel.<\/p>\n<p>We know nothing about James’s career subsequently until about the year 44, when Jesus’ prophecy was fulfilled: James was killed “by the sword” by Herod Agrippa I, and thus became the first of the Twelve whose martyrdom was referred to in the NT (Acts 12:1-2).<\/p>\n<p>The wife of Zebedee was Salome (Mt 27:56; Mk 15:40), who may have been a sister of the Lord’s mother (Jn 19:25). If this were so, it would mean that James and John were first cousins of Jesus and that they may have considered themselves to have been in a privileged position.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JAMES (Person) 1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name. The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it ...","summary_en":"JAMES (Person) 1. James, brother of Jesus; leading elder in the church at Jerusalem; author of the epistle bearing his name. The only two references to James in the Gospels mention him with his brothers Joseph (Greek Joses), Simon, and Judas (Mt 13:55; Mk 6:3). This James may have been, after Jesus, the oldest of the brothers. The question has been raised about whether these were indeed full brothers of Jesus by Mary, for such a situation has created difficulty for those who cannot square it ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20141,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"John, the Apostle","title_en":"John, the Apostle","content_ro":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JOHN, The Apostle<\/h3>\n<p>The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation.<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, there is not a great deal on which to base a biography.<\/p>\n<p>John’s father’s name was Zebedee, and John had a brother called James (Mt 4:21). Among the women at the cross, Matthew names Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and “the mother of Zebedee’s children” (27:56). Mark names the two Marys and adds Salome (Mk 15:40). This indicates that Salome may be the name of John’s mother. If Matthew and Mark are naming the same women as does John, then Salome was Jesus’ “mother’s sister” (Jn 19:25). This would make John a cousin of Jesus. We cannot be certain of this, for there were many women there (Mt 27:55) and there is no way of being sure that Matthew, Mark, and John all name the same three. Many accept the identification, but we can scarcely say more.<\/p>\n<p>John was among those whom Jesus called by the Sea of Galilee (Mt 4:21-22; Mk 1:19-20). This makes him one of the first disciples. It is also possible that he was the unnamed companion of Andrew when that apostle first followed Jesus (Jn 1:35-37). John was important in the little group around Jesus since he was one of three who were especially close to the Master. These disciples were selected to be with Jesus on many great occasions. John, along with his brother James and Peter, was present at the Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-2; Mk 9:2; Lk 9:28-29). Jesus also took just these three into the house of Jairus when he brought that man’s daughter back to life (Mk 5:37; Lk 8:51). Before Jesus’ arrest, it was this trio that he took to pray with him in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mt 26:37; Mk 14:33). Though the three were admonished for sleeping instead of watching in prayer, we must not overlook the fact that in that time of great difficulty, when Jesus faced the prospect of death on a cross, it was to these three that he looked for support.<\/p>\n<p>There are other occasions when John is mentioned in the Gospels. Luke tells us of John’s surprise when the miraculous catch of fish took place (Lk 5:9-10). This is especially noteworthy since John was a fisherman. Toward the close of Jesus’ ministry, we find John coming to Jesus with Peter, James, and Andrew to ask when the end would come and what would be the sign when all things come to their climax (Mk 13:3-4). And on the last evening, Jesus sent Peter and John to prepare the Passover meal (Lk 22:8).<\/p>\n<p>Passages like these show that John was highly esteemed among the apostles and that he stood especially close to Jesus. But there are indications that at first John was far from appreciating what Jesus stood for. When Mark gives his list of the Twelve, he tells us that Jesus gave to James and John the name “Boanerges,” which means “sons of thunder” (Mk 3:17). Some in the early church understood this name as a compliment, thinking it meant that James’s and John’s witness to Jesus would be as strong as thunder. But most see it as pointing to their tempestuousness of character. We see this, for example, when John encounters a man who was casting out demons in Jesus’ name. John instructs him not to, “for he isn’t one of our group” (Mk 9:38; Lk 9:49).<\/p>\n<p>Mark also tells us of an occasion when the sons of Zebedee asked Jesus for the two chief places in his kingdom, one to be on his right and the other on his left (Mk 10:35-40). Matthew adds the point that the words were spoken by the men’s mother, but he leaves us no doubt that James and John were in on it (Mt 20:20-22). Jesus proceeded to ask them whether they could drink the cup he would drink and be baptized with the baptism he would receive. (Clearly, these are metaphors for the suffering Jesus would in due course undergo.) James and John affirmed that they could, and Jesus assured them that they would indeed do this. However, he gave them no assurance about their places in the Father’s kingdom. (But it is plain that James and John would suffer for Christ.) At that time they also failed to understand the loving spirit that moved their Master and was required of them as well.<\/p>\n<p>Another incident that shows the same tempestuous spirit is one involving Samaritan villagers who refused to receive the little band as they traveled. When James and John heard of it, they asked Jesus whether he wanted them to call down fire from heaven to consume the villagers (Lk 9:54). They were clearly at variance with Jesus, and indeed he rebuked them. But we should not miss the zeal they displayed for their Lord, nor their conviction that if they did call down fire it would come. They were sure that God would not fail to answer the prayer of those who asked for vengeance on the opponents of Jesus. There is zeal here and faith, though also a spirit of lovelessness.<\/p>\n<p>The synoptic Gospels thus show us John as a zealous and loyal follower of Jesus. He is not depicted as gentle and considerate. At this time, he knew little of the love that should characterize a follower of Jesus, but he did have faith and a passionate conviction that God would prosper Jesus and those who served him.<\/p>\n<p>John is not mentioned by name in the fourth Gospel, but there are passages that speak about “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). We are not told who this was, but the evidence seems to indicate that it was the apostle John. For example, there is an account of a fishing trip in chapter 21, with a listing of those who went fishing. It includes Peter, who must be ruled out as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” because he is often mentioned along with the beloved disciple. Thomas and Nathanael were there, but there seems to be no reason for seeing either as a likely candidate. Two unnamed men and the sons of Zebedee make up the remainder of the party. James is excluded as being the author because of his early death—around <span>AD<\/span> 44 (Acts 12:2). This leaves us with John or one of the unnamed men. John is favored by the fact that the beloved disciple is linked with Peter on a number of occasions (Jn 13:23-24; 20:2; 21:7). We know from the other Gospels that Peter and John (together with James) were especially close (see also Acts 3; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Of course, one of the unnamed disciples may have been the beloved disciple, but we have no reason to assume this. Further, such a supposition faces the problem of the omission of the name of John the apostle throughout the entire fourth Gospel. If John wrote this book, we can understand his not mentioning himself. But if it was written by someone else, why would that person omit all mention of a man as prominent in the apostolic band as the other Gospels show John to have been? In addition, if John is the author, it would explain why John the Baptist is called simply “John.”<\/p>\n<p>It is argued that “the disciple whom Jesus loved” is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of himself, but it must be said also that it is not the kind of title a man would naturally use of someone else, either. And it may be that John uses it in a modest fashion—partly because he did not want to draw attention to himself by using his name, and partly because he wanted to emphasize the truth that it was the fact that Jesus loved him that made him what he was.<\/p>\n<p>If this identification may be accepted, we learn more about the apostle. We should not, of course, read the words “the disciple whom Jesus loved” as though they meant that Jesus did not love the other disciples. He loved them all. But as applied to John, they mean that he was indeed beloved, probably also that he recognized that he owed all he had and all he was to that love. That he was specially close to Jesus is indicated by the fact that he leaned on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper (Jn 13:23). It also tells us something of his relationship to the Master that he was at the cross when Christ was crucified and that it was to him that Jesus gave the charge to look after his mother (19:26-27). One would have expected that Jesus would have selected one of his family for this responsibility. But his brothers did not believe in him, whereas both John and Mary did. This event certainly shows that a close relationship existed between Jesus and the disciple he loved.<\/p>\n<p>On the first Easter morning, John raced with Peter to the tomb when Mary Magdalene told them it was empty. He won the race but stood outside the tomb until Peter came. Peter, the leader of men, went right in, and John followed. We read that he “saw and believed” (Jn 20:8). Then in chapter 21 we read of the beloved disciple fishing with the others. Significantly, it was he who recognized that it was Jesus who stood on the shore and told them where to cast the net (21:7).<\/p>\n<p>There is not much to add to this picture when we turn to Acts. At the beginning, John’s name occurs in a list of the Twelve (Acts 1:13); and later, when we are told of James’s death, it is noted that he was John’s brother (12:2). In every other reference to John, he is in the company of Peter. These two were the instruments God used in bringing healing to a lame man (ch 3). At that time, they were going to the temple at the hour of prayer. This says something about their habits of devotion. Prayer at the ninth hour apparently refers to the Jewish service of prayer that was held at the same time as the evening offering (i.e., at about three o’clock in the afternoon). Evidently, Peter and John were continuing the devotional habits of pious Jews with an interest in the temple and all its doings. On another occasion, these two were arrested and jailed on account of their preaching about Jesus’ resurrection (4:1-3). They were brought before the council, where Peter spoke for them. The council saw that these two men were “uneducated, common men” (v 13). This means that they had never had the normal rabbinic education. By the standards of the council, they were uneducated. The council forbade them to speak about Jesus, but the apostles’ reply displays John’s typical boldness: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv 19-20, <span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>John was associated with Peter again when the gospel was first preached in Samaria. Philip was the evangelist to the Samaritans, but the apostles in Jerusalem decided to send Peter and John to Samaria when they heard how the people had accepted the gospel message. “As soon as they arrived, they began praying for these new Christians to receive the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:15, <span>tlb<\/span>), a revealing illustration of apostolic priorities. In due course, they laid their hands on the new believers and they received the Holy Spirit (8:17). John is not specifically mentioned, but he no doubt was included in “the apostles” who were arrested and jailed because of the jealousy of prominent Jews (5:17-18). But that imprisonment did not last long, for an angel released them at night, so that they resumed their preaching in the early morning (v 21). John is mentioned by name in Galatians 2:9, where he is joined with Peter and James and the three are called “the pillars of the church.”<\/p>\n<p>This appears to be the extent of the NT’s record of the apostle John. Clearly he was an important figure in the little band of early Christians. On almost every occasion when he comes before us in the record, he is in the company of someone else and normally the speaking is done by his companion, not by John. But we may justly conclude that he stood very close to Jesus. Perhaps he had entered into the mind of Jesus more than any of the others. The best evidence of this is the Gospel of John. Clearly the man who wrote this had great spiritual insight. John may have been more the thinker than a man of action and leader of men.<\/p>\n<p>We have seen that there is good reason to think that the fourth Gospel was written by the apostle John. The epistles of John probably came from him also (though, as they stand, they are anonymous). All the Johannine writings probably emanated from the province of Asia. The heretics alluded to in 1 John resemble the Cerinthians (followers of the heretic Cerinthus), who were in Asia Minor at the end of the first century, and tradition connects the author of 1 John with Ephesus. It is certain that the same person wrote all three letters, and reasonably certain that this author also wrote the Gospel of John; the Gospel and the letters certainly represent the same mind at work in different situations.<\/p>\n<p>An author named John wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 1:1), though it is not clear whether this is the apostle or another John. Tradition has identified the John of Revelation (see Rv 1:1, 9; 22:8) with John the apostle, the author of the Gospel of John and the three letters of John. This view was held by Justin Martyr as early as 140. The main objection to this view is that the original Greek is unlike that of the other Johannine writings, showing scant respect for the rules of the language. Some have suggested that a different John wrote Revelation, others that John’s disciples wrote the Gospel and letters and that John himself wrote Revelation. But it is still plausible that the apostle John (or one of his close disciples) wrote the Gospel and the letters.<\/p>\n<p>Assuming John the apostle wrote Revelation, he was exiled to Patmos (Rv 1:9). But the date of this is uncertain. Some probably unreliable evidence from the late fifth century suggests that John was martyred at about the same time as his brother James (c. 44; see also Acts 12:2). Jesus’ prophecy in Mk 10:39 need not imply that both met with a simultaneous and violent end. Much stronger is the tradition reflected by Polycrates, bishop of Ephesus (c. 190), that John died a natural death in Ephesus, and by Irenaeus (c. 175–195) that John lingered on in Ephesus until the time of the emperor Trajan (ruled c. 97–117).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","summary_en":"JOHN, The Apostle The apostle known as “the disciple whom Jesus loved”; author of the fourth Gospel, three epistles, and probably Revelation. The apostle John has a high reputation among Christian people, and his influence has been felt throughout the centuries. Despite this, he is a surprisingly shadowy figure. When he appears in the pages of the NT, it is almost always in company with Peter or James, and if there is speaking to be done, it is usually his companion Peter who does it; thus, t...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24800,"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":54884,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","summary_en":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54885,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","summary_en":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82510,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","summary_en":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82511,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","summary_en":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110136,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","summary_en":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110137,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","summary_en":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137762,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-28<\/strong> Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","summary_en":"20:20-28 Each prediction of Jesus’ suffering in Matthew is connected to instruction on the nature of discipleship in light of that suffering (see 16:24-28; 17:24–18:5). This teaching called the Messiah’s disciples to follow his example of service and sacrifice.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137763,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:20","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:20-21<\/strong> This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","summary_en":"20:20-21 This mother’s question appears to have been inspired by her sons, since Jesus responded to the sons rather than to the mother (cp. Mark 10:35-37).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":54886,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","summary_en":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82512,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","summary_en":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110138,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","summary_en":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137764,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:21","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:21<\/strong> The promise of sitting in positions of authority <em>in<\/em> God’s <em>Kingdom<\/em> had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","summary_en":"20:21 The promise of sitting in positions of authority in God’s Kingdom had already been given (19:28); the brothers’ request seems to have been motivated out of selfish desire for prominence, with no regard for the suffering the Messiah would soon undergo (see Matt 23:6; Luke 14:7-11).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":8291,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Cup","title_en":"Cup","content_ro":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>CUP<\/h3>\n<p>The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively.<\/p>\n<p>1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs.<\/p>\n<li>2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8; Is 51:17, 22; Jer 49:12; Ez 23:33; Zec 12:2; Rv 14:10; 16:19; 18:6), the Lord (1 Cor 10:21), prosperity or blessing (Ps 23:5), salvation (Ps 116:13), suffering (Mt 20:22; 26:39; Mk 10:39; 14:36; Lk 22:42; Jn 18:11), and thanksgiving (1 Cor 10:16).<\/li>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Cup of Blessing.<\/p>","summary_ro":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","summary_en":"CUP The word may refer either to the vessel itself or to its contents and may be intended literally or figuratively. 1. A small drinking vessel, made of various materials (leather, metal, or pottery), sizes, and designs. 2. A figure of speech to represent one’s portion of or participation in something. It is associated with consolation (Jer 16:7), demons (1 Cor 10:21), divination (Gn 44:2, 5), drunkenness (Prv 23:31), immorality (Rv 17:4; 18:6), inheritance (Ps 16:5), judgment (Pss 11:6; 75:8...","source":"Articles\/C.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54887,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","summary_en":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82513,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","summary_en":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110139,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","summary_en":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137765,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:22","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:22<\/strong> The <em>cup<\/em> refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","summary_en":"20:22 The cup refers to Jesus’ duty, calling, and destiny (see 26:39; John 18:11; see also Ps 75:8; Isa 51:17, 22; Rev 16:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"23":[{"id":42366,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":69992,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":97618,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":125244,"type":"profile","type_label":"Profil","type_icon":"👤","type_color":"#f59e0b","title_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee","title_en":"James, Son of Zebedee","content_ro":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>James, Son of Zebedee<\/h3>\n<p>James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>James and John were fishermen like their father (Matt 4:21; Mark 1:19); they fished with Peter and Andrew, another pair of brothers who became disciples (Luke 5:10). They were among the first that Jesus called to be his disciples, and they left everything, including their father, to follow him (Matt 4:22; Mark 1:20; Luke 5:11). Jesus called them “Sons of Thunder” (Mark 3:17), which might imply that they had vehement personalities (see Luke 9:54), though the exact connotation is unclear.<\/p>\n<p>James and his brother John were among those closest to Jesus. With Peter, they formed an inner circle of trusted disciples who accompanied Jesus on special occasions, as when he healed Jairus’s daughter (Mark 5:37; Luke 8:51), conversed with Elijah and Moses on a mountain (Matt 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-30), and agonized in prayer in the garden (Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33). At one point, the two brothers provoked the indignation of the other disciples by asking for special positions of privilege in the coming Kingdom (Matt 20:20-28; Mark 10:35-45; cp. Luke 22:24-27).<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps because of James’s prominence among the disciples, Herod Agrippa had him killed soon after Jesus’ death, which pleased the Jewish leaders (Acts 12:1-3) and fulfilled Jesus’ prediction about his drinking the bitter cup that Jesus drank (Matt 20:23; Mark 10:38-39).<\/p>\n<p>James was an ordinary working person whom Jesus called to be his disciple. His willingness to leave everything he knew—work, family, and home—to follow Jesus in simple trust, and eventually to die for him, makes him a model of committed discipleship.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matt 4:21-22; 10:2; 17:1; 20:20-24; 26:37-46; Mark 1:19-20, 29; 3:17; 5:37; 9:2; 10:35-41; 13:3-4; 14:33-42; Luke 5:10; 6:14; 8:51; 9:28, 54-55; John 21:2; Acts 1:13; 12:2<\/p>","summary_ro":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","summary_en":"James, Son of Zebedee James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, was one of the twelve apostles, and he was among the first to be killed as a follower of Jesus. His mother was possibly the sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus, which would make him Jesus’ cousin (cp. Matt 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1; John 19:25). His name usually occurs before that of John, which may suggest that James was the older of the two. He should not be confused with James, son of Alphaeus (see Luke 6:15) or James, brother ...","source":"Profiles.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54888,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","summary_en":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82514,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","summary_en":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110140,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","summary_en":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137766,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:23","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:23","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:23<\/strong> <em>You will indeed:<\/em> James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","summary_en":"20:23 You will indeed: James was eventually martyred (Acts 12:2), and John suffered significant persecution (Acts 4:3; 5:40; Rev 1:9).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"24":[{"id":4722,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","title_en":"and Text of the (New Testament) Bible*, Manuscripts","content_ro":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BIBLE*, M<span>anuscripts and Text of the (New Testament)<\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all copies of any work of literature were made by hand (hence, the name “manuscript”). According to a current tabulation, there are 99 papyrus manuscripts, 257 uncial manuscripts, and 2,795 minuscule manuscripts. We can add 2,209 Greek lectionaries to this list. Therefore, we have over 5,350 manuscript copies of the Greek NT or portions thereof. No other work of Greek literature can boast of such numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>• The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantPapyrusManuscripts\">Important Papyrus Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>Papyrus is a tall, aquatic reed, the pith of which is cut into strips, laid in a crosswork pattern and glued together to make a page for writing. The papyrus rolls of Egypt have been used as a writing surface since the early third millennium <span>BC<\/span>. The Greeks adopted papyrus around 900 <span>BC<\/span>, and later the Romans adopted its use. However, the oldest extant Greek rolls of papyrus date from the fourth century <span>BC<\/span>. Unfortunately, papyrus is perishable, requiring a dry climate for its preservation. That is why so many papyri have been discovered in the desert sands of Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>The NT papyrus manuscripts (abbreviated as “P”) are generally the earliest manuscripts of the NT. Broadly speaking, the most important ones can be categorized in three groups: the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (from Oxyrhynchus, Egypt), (2) the Beatty Papyri (named after the owner); and (3) the Bodmer Papyri (named after the owner).<\/p>\n<h5>The Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>Beginning in 1898 B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt discovered thousands of papyrus fragments in the ancient rubbish heaps of Oxyrhynchus, Egypt. This site yielded volumes of papyrus fragments containing all sorts of written material (literature, business and legal contracts, letters, etc.) as well as over 40 manuscripts containing portions of the NT. Some of the more noteworthy papyrus manuscripts from Oxyrhynchus are as follows:<\/p>\n<h6>P1 (P. Oxy. 2)<\/h6>\n<p>This late second-century manuscript contains Matthew 1:1-9, 12, 14-20. Grenfell and Hunt in the winter of 1896–97 went to Oxyrhynchus (now called El Bahnasa) in search of ancient Christian documents. P1 was discovered on the second day of the dig. At the time of this discovery, this was the earliest extant copy of any NT portion—at least 100 years earlier than Codex Vaticanus. The copyist of P1 seems to have faithfully followed a very reliable exemplar. Where there are major variants, P1 agrees with the best Alexandrian witnesses, especially B (Codex Vaticanus), from which it rarely varies.<\/p>\n<h6>P5 (P. Oxy. 208 and 1781)<\/h6>\n<p>Two separate portions of this third-century manuscript were unearthed from Oxyrhynchus by Grenfell and Hunt, both from the same papyrus manuscript. The first portion contains John 1:23-31, 33-40 on one fragment and John 20:11-17 on another—probably on the first and last quires of a manuscript containing only the Gospel of John. This portion was published in volume II of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri<\/em> in 1899; the second portion—containing John 16:14-30—was not published until 1922 in volume XV of <em>Oxyrhynchus Papyri.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>After examining the first portion, Grenfell and Hunt said, “The text is a good one, and appears to have affinities with that of Codex Sinaiticus, with which the papyrus agrees in several readings not found elsewhere.” The papyrus, written in a documentary hand, is marked for its brevity.<\/p>\n<h6>P13 (P. Oxy. 657 and PSI 1292)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated between 175 and 225, contains 12 columns from a roll preserving the text of Hebrews 2:14–5:5; 10:8-22; 10:29–11:13; 11:28–12:7. The text of Hebrews was written in a reformed documentary hand on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy. For this reason, some scholars think the manuscript was possibly brought to Egpyt by a Roman official and left behind when he left his post. P13 very often agrees with B, and it supplements B where it is lacking—namely, from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of Hebrews. P13 and P46 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P77 (P. Oxy. 2683 + 4405)<\/h6>\n<p>Dated c. 150–75, this is the earliest manuscript of Matthew (23:30-39). The manuscript is clearly a literary production. It was written in an elegant hand and has what was or became a standard system of chapter division, as well as punctuation and breathing marks. P77 has close textual affinities with Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n<h6>P90 (P. Oxy. 3523)<\/h6>\n<p>This second-century manuscript (c. 150–75) contains John 18:36–19:7. The handwriting (an upright, rounded, elegant script) is much like that found in P66. Furthermore, P90 has more affinity with P66 than with any other single manuscript, though it does not concur with P66 in its entirety.<\/p>\n\n<h6>P. Oxy. 4404<\/h6>\n<p>Containing Matthew 21:34-37, 43, 45, this manuscript could be the earliest extant manuscript of the NT in that the script is early Roman and therefore could be dated to the early second century.<\/p>\n<h5>The Chester Beatty Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased from a dealer in Egypt during the 1930s by Chester Beatty and by the University of Michigan. The three manuscripts in this collection are very early and contain a large portion of the NT text. P45 (c. 200) contains portions of all four Gospels and Acts; P46 (c. 125) has almost all of Paul’s epistles and Hebrews; and P47 (third century) contains Revelation 9–17.<\/p>\n<h6>P45 (Chester Beatty Papyrus I)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has the four Gospels and Acts (Mt 20:24-32; 21:13-19; 25:41–26:39; Mk 4:36–9:31; 11:27–12:28; Lk 6:31–7:7; 9:26–14:33; Jn 4:51–5:2, 21-25; 10:7-25; 10:30–11:10, 18-36, 42-57; Acts 4:27–17:17). The order of books in the original intact manuscript was probably as follows: Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, Acts (the so-called Western order). This manuscript was dated by Kenyon to the early third century, a date that was confirmed by the papyrologists W. Schubart and H. I. Bell. This continues to be the date assigned to this manuscript in modern handbooks on textual criticism and critical editions of the Greek NT, but the consistent formation of certain letters suggests an earlier date—maybe sometime in the late second century.<\/p>\n<p>The scribe of P45 worked without any intention of exactly reproducing his source. He wrote with a great amount of freedom—harmonizing, smoothing out, substituting at will. In short, the scribe did not actually copy words. He saw through the language to its idea-content, and copied that in words of his own choosing, or in rearranged order. Thus, in the scribe of P45 we see an exegete and a paraphraser.<\/p>\n<h6>P46 (Chester Beatty Papyrus II)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex has most of Paul’s epistles (excluding the Pastorals) in this order: Romans 5:17–6:14; 8:15–15:9; 15:11–16:27; Hebrews 1:1–13:25; 1 Corinthians 1:1–16:22; 2 Corinthians 1:1–13:13; Ephesians 1:1–6:24; Galatians 1:1–6:18; Philippians 1:1–4:23; Colossians 1:1–4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 1:9–2:3; 5:5-9, 23-28 (with minor lacunae in each of the books).<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript was originally dated to the early third century. But others, since, have dated the manuscript earlier in the second century. The scribe who produced this manuscript used an early, excellent exemplar. He was a professional scribe because there are stichoi notations at the end of several books (see the conclusion of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians). The stichoi were used by professionals to note how many lines had been copied for commensurate pay. Most likely, the ex officio of the scriptorium (perhaps connected with a church library) paginated the codex and indicated the stichoi. The scribe himself made a few corrections as he went, and then several other readers made corrections here and there.<\/p>\n<p>The text of P46 shows a strong affinity with B (especially in Ephesians, Colossians, and Hebrews) and next with א (Codex Sinaiticus). P46 agrees much less with the later representatives of the Alexandrian text. In short, P46 is proto-Alexandrian. In Hebrews, P46 and P13 display nearly the same text. Out of a total of 88 variation-units, there are 71 agreements and only 17 disagreements.<\/p>\n<h6>P47 (Chester Beatty Papyrus III)<\/h6>\n<p>This third-century codex contains Revelation 9:10–17:2. The text of P47 agrees more often with that of Codex Sinaiticus than with any other manuscript (including Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus), though it often shows independence.<\/p>\n<h5>The Bodmer Papyri<\/h5>\n<p>These manuscripts were purchased by M. Martin Bodmer from a dealer in Egypt during the 1950s and 1960s. The three important papyri in this collection are P66 (c. 175, containing almost all of John), P72 (third century, having all of 1 and 2 Peter and Jude), and P75 (c. 200, containing large parts of Luke 3—John 15).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h4\" id=\"P66\">P66 (Papyrus Bodmer II)<\/p>\n<p>This manuscript contains most of John’s Gospel (1:1–6:11; 6:35–14:26, 29-30; 15:2-26; 16:2-4, 6-7; 16:10–20:20, 22-23; 20:25–21:9). The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11), making it the earliest witness to not include this spurious passage. The manuscript is usually dated as c. 200, but the renowned paleographer Herbert Hunger has argued that P66 should be dated to the first half, if not the first quarter, of the second century.<\/p>\n<p>According to recent studies, it seems evident that P66 has preserved the work of three individuals: the original scribe, a thoroughgoing corrector, and a minor corrector. With a practiced calligraphic hand, the original scribe of P66 wrote in larger print as he went along in order to fill out the codex. The large print throughout indicates that it was written to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The text exhibits the scribe’s knowledge of other portions of Scripture (inasmuch as he harmonized John 6:69 to Matthew 16:16 and John 21:6 to Luke 5:5), his use of standard <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (a way of writing divine names), and his special use of <em>nomina sacra<\/em> for the words “cross” and “crucify.”<\/p>\n<p>The original scribe was quite free in his interaction with the text; he produced several singular readings that reveal his independent interpretation of the text. While the numerous scribal mistakes would seem to indicate that the scribe was inattentive, many of the singular readings—prior to correction—reveal that he was not detached from the narrative of the text. Rather, he became so absorbed in his reading that he often forgot the exact words he was copying. His task as a copyist was to duplicate the exemplar word for word, but this was frustrated by the fact that he was reading the text in logical semantic chunks and often became a coproducer of a new text. As a result, he continually had to stop his reading and make many in-process corrections. But he left several places uncorrected, which were later fixed by the <em>diorthotes<\/em> (official corrector). The finished product is quite good, presenting a text that is very close to the Alexandrian witnesses.<\/p>\n<h6>P72 (Papyrus Bodmer VII–VIII)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, dated late third century, has an interesting collection of writings in one codex: 1 Peter 1:1–5:14; 2 Peter 1:1–3:18; Jude 1:1-25; the Nativity of Mary, the apocryphal correspondence of Paul to the Corinthians, the eleventh ode of Solomon, Melito’s Homily on the Passover, a fragment of a hymn, the Apology of Phileas, and Psalms 33 and 34.<\/p>\n<p>Scholars think that four scribes took part in producing the entire manuscript. First Peter has clear Alexandrian affinities—especially with B. Second Peter and (especially) Jude display more of an uncontrolled type text (usually associated with the “Western” text), with several independent readings.<\/p>\n<h6>P75 (Papyrus Bodmer XIV–XV)<\/h6>\n<p>This codex contains most of Luke and John (Lk 3:18–4:2; 4:34–5:10; 5:37–18:18; 22:4–24:53; Jn 1:1–11:45, 48-57; 12:3–13:1, 8-9; 14:8-30; 15:7-8.) The manuscript does not include the pericope of the adulteress (7:53–8:11). The manuscript can be dated to the late second or early third century.<\/p>\n<p>The copyist of P75 was a literate scribe trained in making books. His craftsmanship shows through in his tight calligraphy and controlled copying. The handwriting displayed in this manuscript is typically called by paleographers the common angular type of the late second to early third century. The scribe’s Christianity shows in his abbreviations of the <em>nomina sacra<\/em><em>,<\/em> as well as in his abbreviation of the word “cross.” These are telltale signs of a scribe who belonged to the Christian community. Furthermore, the large typeface indicates that the manuscript was composed to be read aloud to a Christian congregation. The scribe even added a system of sectional divisions to aid any would-be lector. Thus, we have a manuscript written by a Christian for other Christians.<\/p>\n<p>There are several indications of the scribe’s Alexandrian orientation. First and foremost is his scriptoral acumen. He is the best of all the early Christian scribes, and his manuscript is an extremely accurate copy. P75 is the work of an extremely disciplined scribe who copied with the intention of being careful and accurate. Scholars generally agree that P75 displays the kind of text that was used in making Codex Vaticanus (there is 87 percent agreement between P75 and B). As such, textual scholars have a high regard for P75’s textual fidelity.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Other Papyrus Manuscripts<\/h5>\n<h6>P4 + P64 + P67<\/h6>\n<p>These three papyrus manuscripts are part of one codex dated <span>AD<\/span> 150–175. The manuscript was the work of a professional scribe, and the text is extremely accurate.<\/p>\n<h6>P32 (Rylands Papyrus 5)<\/h6>\n<p>This manuscript, preserving Titus 1:11-15; 2:3-8, is dated c. 175, making it the earliest extant copy of any of the Pastoral Epistles. P32 shows agreement with א and with F and G. Since F and G (nearly identical manuscripts) go back to the same archetype, it is possible that P32 could be linked to the same source.<\/p>\n<h6>P52 (Rylands Papyrus 457)<\/h6>\n<p>This fragment, containing John 18:31-34, 37-38, is noteworthy because of its date: c. 110–125. Many scholars (F. Kenyon, H. I. Bell, A. Deissmann, and W. H. P. Hatch) have confirmed this dating. The manuscript came from the Fayum or Oxyrhynchus site. It was acquired in 1920 by Grenfell, but it remained unnoticed among hundreds of papyri until 1934, when C. H. Roberts recognized that this fragment preserves a few verses from John’s Gospel.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"ImportantUncialManuscripts\">Important Uncial Manuscripts<\/p>\n<p>The manuscripts typically classified as “uncial” are so designated to differentiate them from papyrus manuscripts. In a sense, this is a misnomer because the real difference has to do with the material they are written on—vellum (treated animal hide) as compared to papyrus—not the kind of letters used. Indeed, the papyri are also written in uncials (capital letters), but the term “uncial” typically describes the majuscule lettering that was prominent in fourth-century biblical texts, such as in א, A, B, C.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Sinaiticus (or א)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex contains the entire OT and the NT in this order: the four Gospels, the Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews), Acts, the General Epistles, Revelation. It also includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The codex cannot be earlier than 340 (the year Eusebius died) because the Eusebian sections of the text are indicated in the margins of the Gospels by a contemporary hand. Most scholars date it 350–375.<\/p>\n<p>This codex was discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in St Catherine’s Monastery (situated at the foot of Mt Sinai). On a visit to the monastery in 1844 he noticed in a wastebasket some parchment leaves that were being used to light the lamps. He was allowed to take this waste paper, which proved to be 43 leaves from various parts of the Greek translation of the OT.<\/p>\n<p>In 1853 he made a second trip to the monastery and found nothing. In 1859, however, on his third trip, he found not only other parts of the OT but also the complete NT. He was finally able to persuade the monastery authorities to present the manuscript to the czar, the great patron of the Greek Catholic Church, who placed it in the Imperial Library in St Petersburg. The czar gave great honors to the monastery and its authorities, and everybody seemed well pleased. Later Tischendorf was charged with having stolen the manuscript from its lawful owners, but the better textual scholars do not accept that story.<\/p>\n\n<p>The manuscript remained in the Imperial Library until 1933, when it was purchased by the British Museum for the huge sum of £100,000 (about $500,000). Textual criticism made the headlines because one manuscript was bought for this much money, raised largely by public subscription during the Great Depression. The manuscript is now on display in the manuscript room of the museum, where it is considered one of its most prized possessions.<\/p>\n<p>The text of Sinaiticus is very closely related to that of Codex Vaticanus. They agree in presenting the purest type of text, usually called the Alexandrian text type. Tischendorf greatly used the textual evidence of Codex Sinaiticus in preparing his critical editions of the Greek NT. Tischendorf thought four scribes had originally produced the codex, whom he named scribes A, B, C, D. After reinvestigation, H. J. Milne and T. C. Skeat identified only three scribes: A (who wrote the historical and poetical books of the OT, as well as most of the NT), B (who wrote the Prophets and the Shepherd of Hermas), and D (who wrote some Psalms, Tobit, Judith, and 4 Maccabees, and redid small sections of the NT). Milne and Skeat demonstrated that scribe A of Codex Vaticanus was likely the same scribe as scribe D of Codex Sinaiticus. If this true, then א is contemporary with B—perhaps produced in the same scriptorium in Alexandria. Codex Sinaiticus provides a fairly reliable witness to the NT; however, the scribe was not as careful as the scribe of B.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Alexandrinus (A)<\/h5>\n<p>This is one of the three most important codices containing early copies of the whole Bible in Greek (the other two being the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus codexes). The name Alexandrinus comes from ancient records suggesting that it was copied in Egypt during the early part of the fifth century <span>AD<\/span>. The early history of this manuscript and its Egyptian provenance is partially revealed by its flyleaves. A note by Cyril of Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria and then of Constantinople in the 1620s) states that, according to tradition, it was written by Thecla, a noble lady of Egypt shortly after the Council of Nicaea (325) and that her name was originally inscribed at the end of the volume but the last page was lost due to mutilation. An Arabic note of the 13th or 14th century also says that the manuscript was written by “Thecla the martyr.” Another Arabic note says that is was presented to the patriarchal cell of Alexandria (c. 1098). Cyril of Lucar took the manuscript from Alexandria to Constantinople in 1621 and then gave it to Charles I of England in 1627, where it became part of the Royal Library, then later the British Museum.<\/p>\n<p>Only 773 of the original 820 or so pages still exist. The rest were lost as the book was passed down through the centuries. The surviving parts of Alexandrinus contain a Greek translation of the whole OT, the Apocrypha (including four books of Maccabees and Psalm 151), most of the NT, and some early Christian writings (of which the First and Second Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians are the most important).<\/p>\n<p>Frederick Kenyon thought the codex was the work of five scribes, to each of whom he designated a Roman numeral. According to Kenyon, scribes I and II copied the OT; scribe III did Matthew, Mark, 1 Corinthians 10:8—Philemon 1:25; scribe IV did Luke—Acts, General Epistles, Romans 1:1—1 Corinthians 10:8; and scribe V did Revelation. Milne and Skeat, however, argued that the whole codex was the work of two copyists (I and II). W. H. P. Hatch noted that many corrections have been made in the manuscript, most of them at an early date. Some of these corrections were introduced by the scribe himself, and others came from later hands.<\/p>\n<p>Evidently, the scribes of this codex used exemplars of varying quality for various sections of the NT. The exemplar used for the Gospels was of poor quality, reflecting a Byzantine text type. Its testimony in the Epistles is much better, and in Revelation it provides the best witness to the original text.<\/p>\n\n<h5>Codex Vaticanus (B)<\/h5>\n<p>Codex Vaticanus is the Vatican Manuscript, so named because it is the most famous manuscript in the Vatican Library in Rome. This manuscript has been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1475, but it was not made available to scholars, such as Constantin von Tischendorf and Samuel Tregelles, until the middle of the 19th century.<\/p>\n<p>At one time, the codex contained the whole Greek Bible, including most of the books of the Apocrypha, but it has lost many of its leaves. Originally it must have had about 820 leaves (1,640 pp), but now it has 759—617 in the OT and 142 in the NT. The major gaps of the manuscript are Genesis 1:1–46:28; 2 Samuel 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 106:27–138:6; Hebrews 9:14–13:25; the Pastoral Epistles; and Revelation. Each leaf measures ten and a half by ten inches (26.7 by 25.4 centimeters). Each page has three columns (two for the poetical books) with 40 to 44 lines to the column. The manuscript was written by two different scribes. It is dated in the early to middle part of the fourth century. It is not known where the manuscript originated, but it has been in the Vatican Library from the time of its earliest catalog in 1475.<\/p>\n\n<p>When Napoleon conquered Rome, he brought its treasures to Paris, including this manuscript. The scholar Hug identified it and called the attention of other scholars to it. After the downfall of Napoleon, the manuscript was returned to the Vatican Library. Competent textual scholars were not allowed to do careful work on it until a photographic edition was published in 1890. It is now on exhibit in the Vatican Library.<\/p>\n<p>The text of the Vatican Manuscript is much like that of Codex Sinaiticus. These are generally recognized as the two finest examples of the Alexandrian type of Greek text of the NT. The Greek text of the OT is very fine too, but it is not quite so important, as the original language of the OT was Hebrew. Virtually all the textual scholars since the days of Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort (who brought out their Greek Testament, including their theory of textual criticism, in 1881), recognize this neutral type of text as a very early text and a very pure text, an extremely accurate reproduction of what the original text must have been. Westcott and Hort called it a second-century text accurate in 999 out of 1,000 words so far as any matter of translatable difference was concerned. א and B are the finest examples of this type of text, but it is also found in a few other Greek uncial manuscripts, a few of the early translations, and in the writings of a few of the early church fathers. Since the days of Westcott and Hort, their theory has been confirmed by the discovery of some papyrus manuscripts, notably the Bodmer Papyri, discovered in the 1950s.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex is a palimpsest (the original writing was erased and different words written on the same material). It originally contained the entire Bible but now has only parts of six OT books and portions of all NT books except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. The single-column Bible text, written in the 5th century <span>AD<\/span>, was erased in the 12th century and replaced by a two-column text of a Greek translation of sermons or treatises by a certain Ephraem, a 4th-century Syrian church leader. Such a practice was common in periods of economic depression or when parchment was scarce. The original writing was scraped from the writing surface and the surface smoothed. Then new compositions could be written on the prepared surface. Using chemicals Tischendorf was able to read much of the erased document.<\/p>\n<p>The manuscript may have been brought from the east to Florence by a learned Greek named Andrew John Lascar in the time of Lorenzo de’Medici. Since Lascar was known as Rhyndacenus (from the river Rhyndacus), he probably came from the region of Phrygia (site of ancient Laodicea). Where the manuscript was prior to this is not known. The Ephraemi manuscript was brought to Italy in the early sixth century, where it became the property of the Medici family. Catherine de’Medici took it to France, where it remains today.<\/p>\n<p>The text of this manuscript is mixed—it is compounded from all the major text types, agreeing frequently with the later koine of Byzantine type, which most scholars regard as the least valuable type of NT text.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Bezae (D)<\/h5>\n<p>This is a Greek-Latin diglot containing Matthew—Acts, 3 John, with lacunae. Most scholars date it late fourth or early fifth century (c. 400). Some scholars think the codex was produced in either Egypt or North Africa by a scribe whose mother tongue was Latin. Another scholar (D. C. Parker) has argued that it was copied in Beirut, a center of Latin legal studies during the fifth century, where both Latin and Greek were used. Evidently, it was produced by a scribe who knew Latin better than Greek, and then was corrected by several scribes. In any event, the codex somehow came into the hands of Theodore Beza, French scholar and successor to Calvin. Beza gave it to the Cambridge University Library in 1581.<\/p>\n<p>This codex is probably the most controversial of the NT uncials because of its marked independence. Its many additions, omissions, and alterations (especially in Luke and Acts) are the work of a significant theologian. A few earlier manuscripts (P29, P38, P48, and 0171) appear to be precursors to the type of text found in D, which is considered the principal witness of the Western text-type. Thus, Codex Bezae could be a copy of an earlier revised edition. This reviser must have been a scholar who had a propensity for adding historical, biographical, and geographical details. More than anything, he was intent on filling in gaps in the narrative by adding circumstantial details.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex Washingtonianus, or The Freer Gospels (W)<\/h5>\n<p>This codex, dated around 400, has the four Gospels and Acts. It is often referred to as the Freer Gospels—named after its owner, Charles Freer. The codex likely came from the ruins of a monastery near Giza. The handwriting is quite similar to that found in a fifth-century fragment of the book of Enoch found at Akhmim in 1886.<\/p>\n<p>Codex W was copied from a parent manuscript (exemplar) that had been pieced together from several different manuscripts. This is obvious because the textual presentation of W is noticeably variegated and even the stratification of the text is matched by similar variations in paragraphing. The scribe who collated the parent manuscript drew upon various sources to put together his Gospel codex. It is likely that the scribe of the parent manuscript used a text that came from North Africa (the “Western” text) for the first part of Mark, and the scribe of W used manuscripts from Antioch for Matthew and the second part of Luke to fill the gaps in the more ancient manuscript he was copying. Detailed textual analysis reveals the variegated textual stratifications of W, as follows: in Matthew the text is Byzantine; in Mark the text is first Western (1:1–5:30), then Caesarean in Mark 5:31–16:20 (akin to P45); in Luke the text is first Alexandrian (1:1–8:12), then Byzantine. John is more complicated because the first part of John (1:1–5:11), which fills a quire, was the work of a seventh-century scribe who must have replaced a damaged quire. (W<span>s<\/span> designates the work of this scribe.) This first section has a mixture of Alexandrian and Western readings, as does the rest of John.<\/p>\n<h5>Codex 1739<\/h5>\n<p>This tenth-century codex has Acts and the Epistles. The manuscript was discovered at Mt Athos in 1879 by E. von der Goltz. The manuscript has strong textual affinities with P46, B, 1739, Coptic Sahidic, Coptic Boharic, Clement, and Origen. The relationship between P46, B, and 1739 is remarkable because 1739 is a tenth-century manuscript that was copied from a fourth-century manuscript of excellent quality. According to a colophon, the scribe of 1739 for the Pauline Epistles followed a manuscript that came from Caesarea in the library of Pamphilus and that contained an Origenian text. The three manuscripts, P46, B, and 1739, form a clear textual line: from P46 (early second century) to B (early fourth century) to 1739 (tenth century based on fourth century).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheTextoftheNewTestament\">The Text of the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>The original text of the NT is the “published” text—that is, the text as it was in its final edited form and released for circulation in the Christian community. For some books of the NT, there is little difference between the original composition and the published text. After the author wrote or dictated his work, he (or an associate) made the final editorial corrections and then released it for distribution. As is the case for books published in modern times, so in ancient times, the original writing of the author is not always the same as what is published—due to the editorial process. Nonetheless, the author is credited with the final edited text, and the published book is attributed to the author and considered the autograph. This autograph is the original published text. Of course, in this case the autographs do not exist, so scholars have to rely on copies to recover or reconstruct the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars think it is impossible to recover the original text of the Greek NT because they have not been able to reconstruct the early history of textual transmission. Other modern scholars are less pessimistic but still quite guarded in affirming the possiblity. And yet others are optimistic because we possess many early manuscripts of excellent quality and because our view of the early period of textual transmission has been getting clearer and clearer.<\/p>\n<p>When we speak of recovering the text of the NT, we are referring to individual books of the NT, not to the entire volume per se, because each book (or group of books—such as the Pauline Epistles) had its own unique history of textual transmission. The earliest extant copy of an entire NT text is the one preserved in Codex Sinaiticus (written about <span>AD<\/span> 375). (Codex Vaticanus lacks the Pastoral Epistles and Revelation.) Prior to the fourth century, the NT was circulated in its various parts: as a single book or a group of books (such as the four Gospels or the Pauline Epistles). Manuscripts from the late first century to the third century have been found with individual books such as Matthew (P1, P77), Mark (P88), Luke (P69), John (P5, 22, 52, 66), Acts (P91), Revelation (P18, 47), or containing groups of books, such as the four Gospels with Acts (P45), the Pauline Epistles (P30, P46, P92), the Petrine Epistles and Jude (P72). Each of the books of the NT has had its own textual history and has been preserved with varying degrees of accuracy. Nonetheless, all of the books were altered from the original state due to the process of manual copying decade after decade and century after century. And the text of each of the books needs to be recovered.<\/p>\n<p>The NT text was affected with many variations in its early history. In the late first and early second century, the oral traditions and the written word existed side by side with equal status—especially with respect to the material of the Gospels. Often, the text was changed by scribes attempting to conform the written message to the oral tradition or attempting to conform one Gospel account to another. By the end of the second century and into the third century, many of the significant variant readings entered into the textual stream.<\/p>\n<p>The early period of textual transmission, however, was not completely marred by textual infidelity and scribal liberty. There were those scribes who copied the text faithfully and reverently—that is, they recognized that they were copying a sacred text written by an apostle. The formalization of canonization did not ascribe this sacredness to the text. Canonization came about as the result of common, historical recognition of the sacredness of various NT books. Certain NT books, such as the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s epistles were considered inspired literature from the onset. As such, certain scribes copied them with reverential fidelity.<\/p>\n<p>Other scribes, however, felt free to make “improvements” in the text—either in the interest of doctrine and harmonization or due to the influence of a competitive oral tradition. The manuscripts produced in such a manner created a kind of “popular text”—i.e., an uncontrolled text. (This text type used to be called the “Western text,” but scholars now recognize this as a misnomer.)<\/p>\n<p>During the second century, there were a few men who produced recensions of the NT text. According to Eusebius, Theodotus (and his followers) altered the text for their own purposes. In the middle of the second century, Marcion expunged his copies of the Gospel according to Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus, and Tatian’s harmony of the Gospels contains several textual alterations that gave support to ascetic views. And yet another recendor created the D-type text for the Gospels and Acts. This theologically minded redactor, living in the late second or third century, created a text that had short-lived popularity. Three third-century papyri, P29, P38, P48, each containing a portion from the book of Acts, may be precursors to the D-type text in Acts. But there are other papyri containing portions of Acts that provide even earlier testimony to a purer form of Acts—namely, P45 (c. 150) and P91 (c. 200), thereby showing that the D-type text of Acts did not necessarily antedate the purer form.<\/p>\n<p>Besides these endeavors—which are all noted for creating textual impurities—there was no recension of the NT text in the second century. Rather, it was a period in which there were scribes who exercised freedom in copying and those who demonstrated acumen. The manuscripts produced by the latter are those that come closest to preserving the original text. A prime example of an accurate late-second-century manuscript is P75.<\/p>\n<p>It is a well-known fact that the text produced by the scribe of P75 is a very accurate manuscript. It is also well-known that P75 was the kind of manuscript used in formulating Codex Vaticanus—the readings of P75 and B are remarkably similar. Prior to the discovery of P75, certain scholars thought Codex Vaticanus was the work of a fourth-century recension; others (chiefly Hort) thought it must trace back to a very early and accurate copy. Hort said that Codex Vaticanus preserves “not only a very ancient text, but a very pure line of a very ancient text” (Westcott and Hort, <em>The<\/em> <em>Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> pp 250–51). P75 appears to have shown that Hort was right.<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of P75, many textual scholars were convinced that the second- and third-century papyri displayed a text in flux, a text characterized only by individual independence. The Chester Beatty Papyrus, P45, and the Bodmer Papyri, P66 and P72 (in 2 Peter and Jude), show this kind of independence. Scholars thought that scribes at Alexandria must have used several such texts to produce a good recension—as is exhibited in Codex Vaticanus. But we now know that Codex Vaticanus was not the result of a scholarly recension, resulting from editorial selection across the various textual histories. Rather, it is now quite clear that Codex Vaticanus was simply a copy (with some modifications) of a manuscript much like P75, not a fourth-century recension.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars may point out that this does not automatically mean that P75 and B represent the original text. What it does mean, they say, is that we have a second-century manuscript showing great affinity with a fourth-century manuscript whose quality has been highly esteemed. But various scholars have demonstrated that there was no Alexandrian recension before the time of P75 (late second century) and B (early fourth) and that both these manuscripts represent a relatively pure form of preservation of a relatively pure line of descent from the original text.<\/p>\n<p>The current view about the early text is that certain scribes in Alexandria and\/or scribes familiar with Alexandrian scriptoral practices (perhaps those in Oxyrhynchus) were probably responsible for maintaining a relatively pure text throughout the second, third, and fourth centuries. The Alexandrian scribes, associated with or actually employed by the scriptorium of the great Alexandrian library and\/or members of the scriptorium associated with the catechetical school at Alexandria (called the <em>Didaskelion<\/em>), were trained philologists, grammarians, and textual critics. Their work on the NT was not recensional—that is, it was not an organized emendation of the text. Rather, the work of purification and preservation was probably done here and there by various individuals trained in text criticism. This is apparent in the production of P66, which contains the Gospel of John. This manuscript was probably produced in an Egyptian scriptorium by a novice scribe who made many blunders, which were subsequently corrected by another scribe working in the same scriptorium. The first text produced by the novice could be classified as being very “free,” but the corrected text is far more accurate. (See the discussion on this manuscript above.)<\/p>\n<p>What appears to have happened with the copying of the NT text in the early period in Egypt has been poignantly characterized by Zuntz. He said that when a book was immensely popular (such as Homer’s <em>Iliad<\/em> and <em>Odyssey,<\/em> or Plato’s writings), it was copied with wild enthusiasm by novice and scholar alike. But when grammarians and scribes got ahold of it, they tried to rid it of textual corruption. In the process, however, they may have obliterated some authentic readings, but not many. Thus, the popular text (also known as the “Western text”) could have preserved the original wording in some cases. The popular or free kind of text is displayed in several third-century manuscripts: P9, P37, P40, P45, P72, and P78.<\/p>\n<p>In brief, this popular text is usually displayed in any kind of manuscript that was not produced by Alexandrian influences. This text, given to independence, is not as trustworthy as the Alexandrian text type. But because the Alexandrian text is known as a polished text, the popular text sometimes preserved the original wording. When a variant reading has the support of “Western” and Alexandrian texts, it is very likely original; but when the two are divided, the Alexandrian witnesses more often preserve the original wording.<\/p>\n<p>One dilemma still remains for some textual critics. They cannot explain how a P75\/B-type text coexisted with a Western-type text in the second century. All that can be said is that the Western text generally appears to be inferior to the P75\/B-type text. Of course, this kind of judgment troubles certain scholars, who point out that the esteem given to B and P75 is based on a subjective appreciation of the kind of text they contain (as over against the Western text) rather than on any kind of theoretical reconstruction of the early transmission of the text. This same subjective estimation was at work when Westcott and Hort decided that B was intrinsically superior to D (see their <em>Introduction,<\/em> pp 32–42). Yet the praxis of textual criticism time and again demonstrates that the P75\/B-type text is intrinsically superior to the Western text.<\/p>\n<p>In the final analysis, the manuscripts that represent a pure preservation of the original text are usually those called “Alexandrian.” Some scholars, such as Bruce Metzger, have called the earlier manuscripts “protoAlexandrian,” for they (or manuscripts like them) are thought of as being used to compose an Alexandrian-type text. However, this is looking at things from the perspective of the fourth century. We should look at things from the second century onward and then compare fourth-century manuscripts to those of the second. The second-century manuscripts could still be called “Alexandrian” in the sense that they were produced under Alexandrian influences. Perhaps a distinguishing terminology could be “early Alexandrian” (pre-Constantine) and “later Alexandrian” (post-Constantine). Manuscripts designated as “early Alexandrian” would generally be purer, less editorialized. Manuscripts designated “later Alexandrian” would display editorialization, as well as the influence of other textual traditions.<\/p>\n<p>The “early Alexandrian” text is reflected in many second- and third-century manuscripts. On the top of the list is P75 (c. 175), the work of a competent and careful scribe. Not far behind in quality is P4+P64+P67 (c. 150), the work of an excellent copyist. Other extremely good copies are P1 (c. 200), P20 (early third century), P23 (c. 200), P27 (third century), P28 (third century), P32 (c. 150), P39 (third century), P46 (c. 125), P65 (third century), P66 (in its corrected form—P66<span>c<\/span>; c. 150), P70 (third century), P77 (c. 150), P87 (c. 125), P90 (c. 175), and P91 (c. 200). Several of these manuscripts have been placed in the “strict” category by textual critics Kurt and Barbara Aland—that is, they exhibit “strict” scribal control and therefore are accurate copies of an exemplar, if not the original. These manuscripts are P1, P23, P35, P37, P39, P64\/67, P65, P70, and P75.<\/p>\n<p>The “later Alexandrian” text, which displays editorial polishing, is exhibited in a few manuscripts, such as א (fourth century), T (fifth century), ע (seventh century), L (eighth century), 33 (ninth century), 1739 (a tenth-century manuscript copied from a fourth-century Alexandrian manuscript much like P46), and 579 (13th century). Beginning in the fifth century, Byzantine-type manuscripts began to make their influence in Egypt. Some manuscripts dated around 400 that came from Egypt clearly reflect this influence; Codex Alexandrinus (A) is probably the best example. Other Egyptian manuscripts of this era, such as Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Washingtonianus (W) display large-scale harmonization, which cannot be directly linked to any kind of recension.<\/p>\n<p>At the end of the third century, another kind of Greek text came into being and then grew in popularity until it became the dominant text-type throughout Christendom. This is the text-type first instigated by Lucian of Antioch, according to Jerome (in his introduction to his Latin translation of the Gospels). Lucian’s text was a definite recension (i.e., a purposely created edition)—as opposed to the Alexandrian text-type that came about as the result of a process wherein the Alexandrian scribes, upon comparing many manuscripts, attempted to preserve the best text—thereby serving more as textual critics than editors. Of course, the Alexandrians did do some editing—such as we would call copy-editing. The Lucianic text is the outgrowth and culmination of the popular text; it is characterized by smoothness of language, which is achieved by the removal of obscurities and awkward grammatical constructions and by the conflation of variant readings. Lucian (and\/or his associates) must have used many different kinds of manuscripts of varying qualities to produce a harmonized, edited NT text. The kind of editorial work that went into the Lucianic text is what we would call substantive editing.<\/p>\n<p>Lucian’s text was produced prior to the Diocletian persecution (c. 303), during which time many copies of the NT were confiscated and destroyed. Not long after this period of devastation, Constantine came to power and then recognized Christianity as the state religion. There was, of course, a great need for copies of the NT to be made and distributed to churches throughout the Mediterranean world. It was at this time that Lucian’s text began to be propagated by bishops going out from the Antiochan school to churches throughout the East, taking the text with them. Lucian’s text soon became the standard text of the Eastern church and formed the basis for the Byzantine text—and is thus the ultimate authority for the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>While Lucian was forming his recension of the NT text, the Alexandrian text was taking on its final shape. As was mentioned earlier, the formation of the Alexandrian text-type was the result of a process (as opposed to a single editorial recension). The formation of the Alexandrian text involved minor textual criticism (i.e., selecting variant readings among various manuscripts) and copyediting (i.e., producing a readable text). There was far less tampering with the text in the Alexandrian text-type than in the Lucian, and the underlying manuscripts for the Alexandrian text-type were superior to those used by Lucian. Perhaps Hesychius was responsible for giving the Alexandrian text its final shape, and Athanasius of Alexandria may have been the one who made this text the archetypal text for Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>As the years went by, there were fewer and fewer Alexandrian manuscripts produced, and more and more Byzantine manuscripts manufactured. Very few Egyptians continued to read Greek (with the exception of those in St Catherine’s Monastery, the site of the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus), and the rest of the Mediterranean world turned to Latin. It was only those in the Greek-speaking churches in Greece and Byzantium that continued to make copies of the Greek text. For century after century—from the 6th to the 14th—the great majority of NT manuscripts were produced in Byzantium, all bearing the same kind of text. When the first Greek NT was printed (c. 1525), it was based on a Greek text that Erasmus had compiled, using a few late Byzantine manuscripts. This printed text, with minor revisions, became the Textus Receptus.<\/p>\n<p>Beginning in the 17th century, earlier manuscripts began to be discovered—manuscripts with a text that differed from that found in the Textus Receptus. Around 1630, Codex Alexandrinus was brought to England. An early fifth-century manuscript, containing the entire NT, it provided a good, early witness to the NT text (it is an especially good witness to the original text of Revelation). Two hundred years later, a German scholar named Constantin von Tischendorf discovered Codex Sinaiticus in St Catherine’s Monastery (located near Mt Sinai). The manuscript, dated around <span>AD<\/span> 360, is one of the two oldest vellum (treated animal hide) manuscripts of the Greek NT. The earliest vellum manuscript, Codex Vaticanus, had been in the Vatican’s library since at least 1481, but it had not been made available to scholars until the middle of the 19th century. This manuscript, dated slightly earlier (<span>AD<\/span> 350) than Codex Sinaiticus, had both the OT and NT in Greek, excluding the last part of the NT (Hebrews 9:15 to Revelation 22:21 and the Pastoral Epistles). A hundred years of textual criticism has determined that this manuscript is one of the most accurate and reliable witnesses to the original text.<\/p>\n<p>Other early and important manuscripts were discovered in the 19th century. Through the tireless labors of men like Constantin von Tischendorf, Samuel Tregelles, and F. H. A. Scrivener, manuscripts such as Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Codex Zacynthius, and Codex Augiensis were deciphered, collated, and published.<\/p>\n<p>As the various manuscripts were discovered and made public, certain scholars labored to compile a Greek text that would more closely represent the original text than did the Textus Receptus. Around 1700 John Mill produced an improved Textus Receptus, and in the 1730s Johannes Albert Bengel (known as the father of modern textual and philological studies in the NT) published a text that deviated from the Textus Receptus according to the evidence of earlier manuscripts.<\/p>\n<p>In the 1800s certain scholars began to abandon the Textus Receptus. Karl Lachman, a classical philologist, produced a fresh text (in 1831) that represented the fourth-century manuscripts. Samuel Tregelles (self-taught in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek), laboring throughout his entire lifetime, concentrated all of his efforts in publishing one Greek text (which came out in six parts, from 1857 to 1872). As is stated in the introduction to this work, Tregelles’s goal was “to exhibit the text of the NT in the very words in which it has been transmitted on the evidence of ancient authority.” Henry Alford also compiled a Greek text based upon the best and earliest manuscripts. In his preface to <em>The Greek New Testament<\/em> (a multivolume commentary on the Greek NT, published in 1849), Alford said he labored for the “demolition of the unworthy and pedantic reverence for the received text, which stood in the way of all chance of discovering the genuine word of God.”<\/p>\n<p>During this same era, Tischendorf was devoting a lifetime of labor to discovering manuscripts and producing accurate editions of the Greek NT. In a letter to his fiancé he wrote, “I am confronted with a sacred task, the struggle to regain the original form of the NT.” In fulfillment of his desire, he discovered Codex Sinaiticus, deciphered the palimpsest Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, collated countless manuscripts, and produced several editions of the Greek NT (the eighth edition is considered the best).<\/p>\n<p>Aided by the work of the previous scholars, two British men, Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort, worked together for 28 years to produce a volume entitled <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek<\/em> (1881). Along with this publication, they made known their theory (which was chiefly Hort’s) that Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (along with a few other early manuscripts) represented a text that most closely replicated the original writing. They called this text the Neutral Text. (According to their studies, the Neutral Text described certain manuscripts that had the least amount of textual corruption.) This is the text that Westcott and Hort relied upon for compiling their volume.<\/p>\n<p>The 19th century was a fruitful era for the recovery of the Greek NT; the 20th century, no less so. Those living in the 20th century have witnessed the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the Chester Beatty Papyri, and the Bodmer Papyri. To date, there are nearly 100 papyri containing portions of the NT—several of which date from the late first century to the early fourth century. These significant discoveries, providing scholars with many ancient manuscripts, have greatly enhanced the effort to recover the original wording of the NT.<\/p>\n<p>At the beginning of the 20th century, Eberhard Nestle used the best editions of the Greek NT produced in the 19th century to compile a text that represented the majority consensus. The work of making new editions was carried on by his son for several years, and then came under the care of Kurt Aland. The latest edition (the 27th) of Nestle-Aland’s <em>Novum Testamentum Graece<\/em> appeared in 1993. The same Greek text appears in another popular volume published by the United Bible Societies, called the <em>Greek New Testament<\/em> (fourth edition). Aland has argued that the Nestle-Aland text, 27th edition (NA<span>27<\/span>), comes closer to the original text of the NT than did Tischendorf or Westcott and Hort. And in several writings he intimates that NA<span>27<\/span> may very well be the original text. Though few, if any, scholars would agree with this, the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text is regarded by many as representing the latest and best in textual scholarship.<\/p>\n<h5>New Testament Textual Criticism<\/h5>\n<p>Textual critics working with ancient literature universally acknowledge the supremacy of earlier manuscripts over later ones. Textual critics not working with the NT would love to have the same kind of early witnesses that biblical scholars possess. In fact, many of them work with manuscripts written 1,000 years after the autographs were composed! We all marvel that the Dead Sea Scrolls have provided a text that is nearly 800 years closer to the originals than the Masoretic manuscripts, and yet many of the Dead Sea manuscripts are still over 600 to 800 years removed from the time of original composition. NT textual critics have a great advantage!<\/p>\n<p>The 19th-century NT textual scholars—such as Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort—worked on the basis that the earliest witnesses are the best witnesses. Some textual scholars have continued this line of recovery using the testimony of the earlier witnesses. But many textual scholars since the time of Westcott and Hort have been less inclined to produce editions based on the theory that the earliest reading is the best. Most present-day textual critics are more inclined to endorse the maxim: the reading that is most likely original is the one that best explains the variants.<\/p>\n<p>This maxim (or “canon” as it is sometimes called), as good as it is, produces conflicting results. For example, two scholars, using this same principle to examine the same variant unit, will not agree. One will argue that one variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author’s style; the other will claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author’s style. One will argue that one variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another will claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodox or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.<\/p>\n<p>Modern textual scholars have attempted to temper the subjectivism by employing a method called “reasoned eclecticism.” This kind of eclecticism applies a combination of internal and external considerations, whereby the character of the variants is evaluated in light of the manuscripts’ evidence and vice versa. This is supposed to produce a balanced view and serve as a check against purely subjective tendencies.<\/p>\n<p>The Alands favor the same kind of approach, calling it the local-genealogical method, which is defined as follows:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>It is impossible to proceed from the assumption of a manuscript stemma, and on the basis of a full review and analysis of the relationships obtaining among the variety of interrelated branches in the manuscript tradition, to undertake a recension of the data as one would do with other Greek texts. Decisions must be made one by one, instance by instance. This method has been characterized as eclecticism, but wrongly so. After carefully establishing the variety of readings offered in a passage and the possibilities of their interpretation, it must always then be determined afresh on the basis of external and internal criteria which of these readings (and frequently they are quite numerous) is the original, from which the others may be regarded as derivative. From the perspective of our present knowledge, this “local-genealogical” method (if it must be given a name) is the only one which meets the requirements of the NT textual tradition. (Introduction to <em>Novum Testamentum Graece,<\/em> 26th edition)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The “local-genealogical” method assumes that for any given variation unit any manuscript (or manuscripts) may have preserved the original text. Applying this method produces an extremely uneven documentary presentation of the text. Anyone studying the critical apparatus of NA<span>27<\/span> will detect that there is not an even documentary presentation. The eclecticism is dispersed throughout the text.<\/p>\n<p>“Reasoned eclecticism” and\/or the “local-genealogical” method tend to give priority to internal evidence over external evidence. But it has to be the other way around if we are going to recover the original text. This was Westcott and Hort’s opinion. With respect to their compilation of <em>The New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> Hort wrote, “Documentary evidence has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour against internal evidence” (<em>The Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek,<\/em> p 17).<\/p>\n<p>In this respect, Westcott and Hort need to be revived. Earnest Colwell was of the same mind when he wrote “Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program.” Colwell decried the growing tendency to rely entirely on the internal evidence of readings, without serious consideration of documentary evidence. He called upon scholars to make an attempt to reconstruct a history of the manuscript tradition. The abundance of manuscripts—several of which are very early—will aid scholars in this ongoing task.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","summary_en":"BIBLE*, Manuscripts and Text of the (New Testament) Copies of the NT books produced by scribes and editions made from these copies. In the centuries prior to the simultaneous-multiple production of copies via dictation (wherein many scribes in a scriptorium transcribed a text dictated to them by one reader), all manuscript copies were made singly—each scribe producing a copy from an exemplar. Prior to the 15th century, when Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type for the printing press, all ...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54889,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","summary_en":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82515,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","summary_en":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110141,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","summary_en":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137767,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:24","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:24","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:24<\/strong> The <em>other disciples<\/em> . . . <em>were indignant:<\/em> Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to <em>James and John<\/em> (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","summary_en":"20:24 The other disciples . . . were indignant: Selfish ambition was apparently not unique to James and John (see also 21:15; 26:8; Luke 13:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60665,"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":88291,"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":115917,"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":143543,"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}],"25":[{"id":54890,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","summary_en":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82516,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","summary_en":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110142,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","summary_en":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137768,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:25","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:25","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:25-28<\/strong> The desire for power is characteristic of pagan <em>rulers in this world<\/em>. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the <em>Son of Man<\/em> (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","summary_en":"20:25-28 The desire for power is characteristic of pagan rulers in this world. It ought not to be a trait of those who follow the Son of Man (18:1-5; 19:13-15; 23:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64510,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology","title_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","summary_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65094,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66364,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":66766,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92136,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology","title_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","summary_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92720,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":93990,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":94392,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":119762,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology","title_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","summary_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120346,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":121616,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":122018,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147388,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology","title_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology","content_ro":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Temple Legislation as Theology<\/h3>\n<p>The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier description of the Temple’s architecture.<\/p>\n<p>These regulations highlighted the need for proper separation between the Temple and the palace. The sacrificial rituals would become more numerous and more focused on purification. Holy offerings would once again be made by holy people to the holy God. These practices were completely devoted to the separation of the holy from the unholy and to the cleansing of God’s people. Since defilement of the Temple and idolatrous worship had driven the Lord out of his house (Ezek 8–11), an entirely new situation was necessary if God was to dwell once more among his people. Thus, the function of this legislation was to convict the prophet’s hearers of their past abuses that had broken down the wall of separation between the holy and the unholy and to reassure them that God would restore his people’s worship to its proper state.<\/p>\n<p>This legislation also puts the prince, the king descended from David, in a proper place of submission to the Lord. This element finds fulfillment with the coming of Christ. Jesus came as a servant King who delighted to do the Father’s will (Matt 4:1-11; 20:25-28). He offered the perfect purification offering, cleansed the heavenly sanctuary once for all time (Heb 9:11-12, 23), and ensured that God could dwell in the midst of his people forever. His blood cleanses us of all sin and enables sinners to boldly enter the heavenly Most Holy Place without fear of rejection or reprisal.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Isa 56:7; Ezek 8:1–11:25; 40:1–43:27; 44:1–46:18<\/p>","summary_ro":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","summary_en":"Temple Legislation as Theology The rabbis of Judaism spent a great deal of time seeking to harmonize the laws of Ezekiel 44–48 with the laws of the Torah. They were unsuccessful because the legislation in these chapters was no more intended to match that of Moses than the vision of the Temple building (Ezek 40–43) was designed to match the design of the Tabernacle or the Temple of Solomon. The description of the Temple regulations conveys a theological message of change, as did the earlier de...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147972,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Messiah","title_en":"The Messiah","content_ro":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Messiah<\/h3>\n<p>The Greek term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">christos<\/span> is equivalent to the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">mashiakh<\/span> (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.”<\/p>\n<p>In Judaism, the term <em>messiah<\/em> was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant expectation among Jews in Jesus’ time was that the Messiah would be a political warrior who would lead Israel to victory over its oppressors and reestablish Israel as a separate kingdom (see <em>Psalms of Solomon<\/em> 17–18). Some Jews saw the Messiah as a forerunner of the Kingdom of God. The community at Qumran, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, expected a Messiah who would function both as a priest and as a political warrior.<\/p>\n<p>Given such ambiguity, it is not surprising that Jesus avoided the title. He taught his followers that he would suffer according to Isaiah’s predictions (Isa 52:13–53:12, which Jews interpreted as referring to the nation of Israel). The emphasis Jesus gave to suffering and service as the path of victory (Matt 16:21-28; 20:25-28) collided with the popular Jewish paradigm of the Messiah as a royal conqueror. It was, however, God’s means of bringing about his Kingdom (see Luke 2:25-32; John 12:37-50; Acts 2:29-36).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Gen 17:6; Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; Isa 52:13–53:12; Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10; Matt 2:4-6; 11:2-6; 16:13-20; 17:10-12; 22:41-46; 24:23-27; 26:62-65; Luke 2:8-11, 25-35; 3:15-18; 23:35-43; 24:26-27, 46-47; John 4:21-29; 7:25-27, 31, 40-43; 12:34-50; 20:30-31; Acts 2:22-36; 3:17-26; 4:25-28; 9:22; 13:23-25; 17:3; 26:22-23; 28:17-24<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","summary_en":"The Messiah The Greek term christos is equivalent to the Hebrew mashiakh (“anointed one”), and both terms can be translated as “Messiah.” In Judaism, the term messiah was understood in a variety of ways. The Old Testament refers to people, not all of them honorable, who were specially anointed by God for a variety of reasons or tasks (Exod 28:41; 1 Sam 9:16; 1 Kgs 19:16; Isa 45:1).The prophets expected a future Messiah who would usher in God’s Kingdom (Dan 9:25-26; Zech 9:9-10). The dominant ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149242,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Empowering Leadership","title_en":"Empowering Leadership","content_ro":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Empowering Leadership<\/h3>\n<p>In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer the food program (6:5-6). Many interpreters see these seven as the first deacons (see study note on 6:2-6). A clear division of labor was agreed upon, with the apostles attending to preaching and teaching, and the material needs of the people being handled by other Spirit-filled leaders. The apostles provided empowering leadership by sensitively listening to genuine community needs. This wise handling of the issue, with the united, responsible action of all involved, resulted in spiritual growth and an increased number of believers (6:7).<\/p>\n<p>Different gifts were recognized in the church and put to work for the common good (see 1 Cor 12:4-11; 1 Pet 4:10-11). And every believer has the opportunity to exercise some kind of ministry. This usefulness of every Christian in the service of God is sometimes called the “priesthood of all believers” (1 Pet 2:5, 9; Rev 1:6; 5:10; see Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Rev 20:6). Not everyone has the same role, but all have the same calling to use their gifts in God’s service.<\/p>\n<p>God has given the church its leaders, not to “lord it over” other people, but to serve the community (Matt 20:25-28; Mark 10:42-45; Luke 22:25-27; 1 Pet 5:1-4). The leaders of the church do well when they recognize both the needs of the community and those whom God has prepared to meet those needs. Good leaders recognize gifted people and help them develop, empowering the members of the body to use their God-given gifts (Eph 4:11-12).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6; Matt 20:25-28; Acts 6:1-7; 1 Cor 12:4-11; Eph 4:11-12; 1 Pet 2:5, 9; 4:10-11; Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6<\/p>","summary_ro":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","summary_en":"Empowering Leadership In Acts 6:1-7 the new Christian community faced a crisis of leadership. The Hellenists, the Greek-speaking Jews in Jerusalem, were upset because the needs of their widows were being overlooked in “the daily distribution of food” (6:1). This disruption threatened the development of the church with “rumblings of discontent” (6:1) and had to be seriously addressed. Wisely, the apostles recognized the problem (6:2-3) and called for the selection of seven men to administer th...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":149644,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Old Realm and the New","title_en":"The Old Realm and the New","content_ro":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Old Realm and the New<\/h3>\n<p>Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm to which they belong.<\/p>\n<p>Each realm is headed by a man who represents its constituents. The old realm of sin and death is headed by Adam, the first man, while the new realm of forgiveness and life is headed by Christ. By nature, all human beings are in the old realm of sin and death and are represented by Adam, the first man—whose sin and death control the destiny of all people (5:12, 18-19). Those who put their faith in God through Christ are transferred by faith into the new realm of life. God appointed Jesus Christ as a “second Adam” (see 5:14). By obeying God and fulfilling God’s will, Jesus won a decisive victory over the realm of sin that Adam had inaugurated (5:18-19). By receiving God’s gift of grace (5:17), people accept Jesus as their head and look forward to eternal life.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are in the new realm are identified with Christ and enjoy the benefits of union with him. They have “died with Christ,” they have been “buried with Christ,” and their present new life with Christ is an anticipation of the day when they will “live with him” forever (6:3-11).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Pss 2:1-10; 110:2; 145:13; Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-28; Matt 3:2; 6:10; 7:13; 8:11-12; 12:25-28; 13:44-52; 20:25-28; John 18:36; Rom 5:12–8:39; 14:17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:20-28; Gal 5:16-26; Eph 1:3, 20; 2:6; 5:1-20; Col 1:13-14; Heb 6:4-5; 12:18-29; Rev 11:15; 12:10<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","summary_en":"The Old Realm and the New Jews in Paul’s day perceived a contrast between the “present evil age” and a “glorious age to come.” Throughout Romans 5–8, Paul uses these contrasting realms to conceptualize our experience of salvation. The old realm is ruled by death (5:12-21), sin (ch 6), the law (ch 7), and sinful nature (8:1-11). The new realm is characterized by life (ch 5), righteous living (ch 6), grace (ch 6), and the Holy Spirit (ch 8). People’s destinies are directly impacted by the realm...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"26":[{"id":8888,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Deacon, Deaconess*","title_en":"Deacon, Deaconess*","content_ro":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEACON, DEACONESS*<\/h3>\n<p>Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century <span>AD<\/span> Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OriginsoftheConcept\">Origins of the Concept<\/p>\n<h5>Greek Usage<\/h5>\n<p>References have been found in extrabiblical writings where the Greek word “deacon” meant “waiter,” “servant,” “steward,” or “messenger.” In at least two instances it indicated a baker and a cook. In religious usage the word described various attendants in pagan temples. Ancient documents show “deacons” presiding at the dedication of a statue to the Greek god Hermes. Serapis and Isis, Egyptian deities, were served by a college of “deacons” presided over by a priest.<\/p>\n<h5>General New Testament Usage<\/h5>\n<p>The same word was used by biblical writers in a general sense to describe various ministries or services. Not until later in the development of the apostolic church was the term applied to a distinct body of church officers. Among its general usages, “deacon” refers to a waiter at meals (Jn 2:5, 9), a king’s attendant (Mt 22:13), a servant of Satan (2 Cor 11:15), a servant of God (6:4), a servant of Christ (11:23), a servant of the church (Col 1:24-25), and a political ruler (Rom 13:4).<\/p>\n<p>The NT presents servanthood in the sense of ministry or service as a mark of the whole church—that is, as normative for all disciples (Mt 20:26-28; Lk 22:26-27). Jesus’ teaching on the final judgment equates ministry with feeding the hungry, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, and visiting the sick and imprisoned (Mt 25:31-46). The entire NT emphasizes compassionate care for individuals’ physical and spiritual needs as well as the giving of oneself to meeting those needs. Such service is ultimately a ministry to Christ himself (v 45).<\/p>\n<h5>Origin of the Office<\/h5>\n<p>There is little question that before the end of the first century the general term for service or ministry became a kind of title for a position or office in the church. That development evidently went through several stages.<\/p>\n<p>Some biblical scholars emphasize a relationship between the <em>hazzan<\/em> of the Jewish synagogue and the Christian office of deacon. The <em>hazzan<\/em> opened and closed the synagogue doors, kept it clean, and handed out the books for reading. It was probably to such a person that Jesus handed the scroll of Isaiah after finishing his reading (Lk 4:20).<\/p>\n<p>Other NT scholars give considerable attention to the choosing of the seven (Acts 6:1-6); they see that action as a historical forerunner of a more developed structure (Phil 1:1; 1 Tm 3:8-13—the two specific references to an “office” of deacon). Luke devoted considerable attention in Acts to the selection of a new set of church leaders. Overworked with a variety of responsibilities, the 12 apostles proposed a division of labor to ensure care for the Hellenist (Greek-speaking) widows in the church’s daily distribution of food and alms. Seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom (Acts 6:3), subsequently became prominent in the Jerusalem congregation, doing works of charity and caring for physical needs.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars caution that the diaconate should not be exclusively linked with charitable works, since the Greek word used in Acts 6:2 is related to the word translated “ministry of the word” in verse 4. Those chosen to oversee the care for physical needs were people of spiritual stature. Stephen, for instance, “full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs” (6:8, <span>rsv<\/span>). Philip, appointed as one of the seven in Acts 6, “preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (8:12). Philip also baptized (v 38) and is referred to as an evangelist (21:8).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"DeaconsintheEarlyChurch\">Deacons in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>Those who cite Acts 6 as a preliminary stage of the office of deacon refer to the spread of the practice from the church in Jerusalem to the gentile congregations sprouting elsewhere. Many churches probably took the appointing of “the Jerusalem seven” as a pattern to follow, some even adopting the number seven. In a letter of the third-century pope Cornelius, for example, the church of Rome was said to have maintained seven for the number of deacons.<\/p>\n<p>By the time the church of Philippi received its instructions from the apostle Paul (c. <span>AD<\/span> 62) and Timothy had Paul’s first letter in hand, “deacon” had become a technical term referring to a specific office in the churches. In Philippians 1:1 Paul addressed the church in general and then added “with bishops and deacons.” Some interpreters consider that to be a clear establishment of two distinct groups within the larger church body, though no further description is given. Possibly the deacons of that congregation were responsible for collecting and then dispatching the offerings referred to (Phil 4:14-18).<\/p>\n<p>In 1 Timothy 3:8-13 instructions are given about qualifications for the office of deacon. Although that is the most detailed treatment of the subject in the NT, it is actually quite sketchy. Most of the qualifications, dealing with personal character and behavior, are similar to those for a bishop. For instance, a deacon is to be truthful, monogamous, “not addicted to much wine,” and a responsible parent. Verse 11, requiring that “the women likewise must be serious, not slanderers, but temperate, faithful in all things” (<span>rsv<\/span>), may refer not to deacons’ wives but to deaconesses, as several translations note (<span>niv<\/span>, <span>neb<\/span>). In any event, it is clear that women participated in the work of the diaconate.<\/p>\n<p>In contrast to the office of bishop (1 Tm 3:2), deacons are not described as providing teaching or hospitality. In fact, no mention is made of any functional qualifications to clarify deacons’ or deaconesses’ roles in the early church. The character qualifications listed are appropriate for those with monetary and administrative responsibilities (as Acts 6:1-6 suggests). Timothy is told that good deacons will not go unrewarded; not only will their faith increase, but also their good standing among those whom they serve (1 Tm 3:13).<\/p>\n<p>The NT writings indicate that to be chosen as a deacon or deaconess is a high compliment and affirmation. Named as “deacons” were Timothy (1 Thes 3:2; 1 Tm 4:6), Tychicus (Col 4:7), Epaphras (1:7), Paul (1 Cor 3:5)—and even Christ (Rom 15:8, “servant”). Biblical “deaconing” is not characterized by power and prominence but by service to others. In imitation of Jesus’ life, the deacon or deaconess followed the servant pattern. The Christian diaconate thus contrasted sharply with the prevailing Greek thought of service, which was considered unworthy of the dignity of free men. (The Greek philosopher Plato wrote, “How can man be happy when he has to serve someone?”)<\/p>\n<p>The office of deacon differed from the office of elder, which was adapted from a definite Jewish pattern in the OT (see Nm 11:16-17; Dt 29:10). The diaconate, on the other hand, developed from the strong, personal, historical example of Jesus, the servant who compassionately met concrete human needs.<\/p>\n<p>As the office of deacon became more firmly established, its duties could be defined as those of pastoral care. The poor and the sick received their service not only physically but also with instruction and consolation. The homes of church members became familiar territory to a deacon or deaconess. A pattern of visitation was established to discover and then meet the needs of the church body at large. Although that included the administration of funds, it went far beyond it. Those who served as deacons and deaconesses undoubtedly became symbols of loving care for the church in general.<\/p>\n<p>Where the office of deacon fits into the larger pattern of church order within the NT is difficult to determine because of the obvious variety present during the formative years. Some church historians conclude that as ecclesiastical structure developed, elders provided congregational leadership. Deacons assisted them, especially in social services and pastoral care. The late first and early second centuries witnessed a distinctive threefold ministry of deacons, elders (presbyters), and bishops. Bishops or “overseers” began to exercise authority over areas or groups of churches.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Deaconess\">Deaconess<\/p>\n<p>Where did women fit into the ministry of the early church? Paul’s inclusion of references to women in ministry is striking when compared with the role of women in general in the first century. He commended Phoebe for her service in the church at Cenchrea, using the word “deacon” to describe her (Rom 16:1). He praised her as a “helper” (v 2), a word that denotes leadership qualities (cf. Rom 12:8; 1 Tm 3:4-5). Some scholars have used that reference as an example of early development of the office of deaconess. Others have interpreted it in a nontechnical sense, meaning that Phoebe functioned in a generally serving role and thus was worthy of recognition at Rome. Whether “deacon” was used technically or descriptively, ministry for both women and men in the NT was patterned after the example of Jesus, who “came not to be served but to serve” (Mk 10:45). Because of the large number of female converts (Acts 5:14; 17:4), women functioned in such areas of ministry as visitation, instruction in discipleship, and assistance in baptism. Deaconesses are mentioned in third-century documents as administering baptism to female converts.<\/p>\n<p>Considering the rigid separation of the sexes in the Near East at that time, female participation in church ministry stands out in bold relief. A governor of Bithynia, Pliny the Younger (early second century), in his <em>Correspondence with Trajan<\/em> verified women officeholders in the church. Pliny also mentioned two deaconesses who were martyred for the cause of Christ.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Bishop; Elder; Pastor; Presbyter.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","summary_en":"DEACON, DEACONESS* Terms designating an officer in a local church, derived from a Greek word meaning “servant” or “minister.” The term “diaconate” is used for the office itself or for the collective body of deacons and deaconesses. As with many other biblical words used today in a technical sense, the words “deacon” and “deaconess” began as popular, nontechnical terms. Both in secular first-century AD Greek culture and in the NT, they described a variety of services. Origins of the Concept Gr...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"27":[{"id":54891,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","summary_en":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82517,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","summary_en":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110143,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","summary_en":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137769,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:27","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:27","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:27<\/strong> The word <em>slave<\/em> is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","summary_en":"20:27 The word slave is a common metaphor for the submissive relationship of a disciple to his master (8:9; 10:24-25; 24:45-51; 25:14-30). Jesus’ disciples serve others, following Jesus’ example (e.g., John 13:1-17).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"28":[{"id":11329,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"of Christ*, Exaltation","title_en":"of Christ*, Exaltation","content_ro":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>EXALTATION OF CHRIST*<\/h3>\n<p>The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement.<\/p>\n<p>During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28; Jn 3:14; 6:51; 10:11; etc.) but also that he would thereafter be exalted by the power of the Father to heavenly dominion and glory (Lk 24:26; Jn 17:5). This humiliation-exaltation pattern was plainly indicated by Jesus on the occasion of his encounter with a delegation of proselytes who sought to meet with the Lord (Jn 12:20-36). Jesus far exceeded the expectations of these Greeks by declaring that fellowship with his Father would be extended to the Gentiles in consequence of his imminent passion and resurrection. By affirming, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified” (Jn 12:23, <span>rsv<\/span>), Jesus indicated that he would be endowed with honor and splendor at his exaltation to the presence of the Father in heaven. Jesus’ teaching in respect to his exaltation to heaven provided the foundation for the church’s more explicit teaching on the subject.<\/p>\n<p>The resurrection, the initial event in the exaltation of Jesus, is one of the central affirmations of NT teaching (Acts 2:24, 32; 3:15; 4:10; Rom 1:4; 1 Cor 15:4). From apostolic times Christians have consistently affirmed that at a particular moment in time and in a given place its founder literally passed from a state of death to a state of endless life. The absolute uniqueness of Christ’s exaltation via bodily resurrection from the dead sets Christianity in a class by itself among the religions of the world. A reading of the NT plainly indicates that Jesus openly predicted that death was unable to defeat him. To the skeptical Jews who demanded from Jesus a sign of the authority by which he purged the temple, the Lord answered: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” (Jn 2:19, <span>rsv<\/span>). After Peter’s crucial confession of Christ’s divine sonship at Caesarea Philippi, Jesus gave to his followers a more detailed account of the divine plan whereby he would be raised from the dead on the third day (Mt 16:21). To the disciples who assembled in Galilee shortly after his transfiguration, Jesus spoke plainly of his forthcoming exaltation: “The Son of man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and he will be raised on the third day” (17:22-23, <span>rsv<\/span>). In the NT, the apostolic teaching about Christ’s death is almost always accompanied by an emphasis upon the certainty of his physical resurrection after three days.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the NT writers were careful to spell out the profound theological significance of Christ’s exaltation in resurrection: (1) it demonstrates Christ’s certain power over death and the grave (Acts 2:24; 1 Cor 15:54-56); (2) it confirms the validity of Christ’s teachings, particularly his claims to divine Sonship (Acts 2:36; Rom 1:4); (3) it represents God’s ultimate vindication of his obedient, suffering servant (Phil 2:8-9); (4) it is the means of the justification (Rom 4:25) and regeneration (1 Pt 1:3) of the believer; and (5) it is the guarantee of the future resurrection of the Christian (Rom 6:5; 1 Cor 15:22-24). The effective cause of Christ’s resurrection is declared to be, on one hand, God (Ps 16:10; Acts 2:32; Eph 1:19-20) and, on the other hand, our Lord himself (Jn 2:19; 10:17-18).<\/p>\n<p>The ascension represents the second phase of the exaltation of Christ. According to the two NT historical accounts (Lk 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11), 40 days after his death Jesus left his disciples for the last time and ascended into heaven. Jesus, who several times in John’s Gospel specifically refers to his ascension (Jn 3:13; 6:62; 14:12; 20:17), regarded the place to which he would depart as an actual locality in the heavenly realm (14:2). In his reflection upon this second stage of the exaltation intimated by Psalm 68:18, the apostle Paul associates the ascension with Christ’s triumph over his foes and the bestowal of spiritual gifts to the church (Eph 4:8). The victor triumphantly returned to his Father’s throne in order to bless his people. In what may be part of an early Christian hymn, Paul explicates what he regards as the supreme “mystery” of the Christian faith, namely, that Christ Jesus who “was manifested in the flesh” was at the close of his life “taken up into glory” (1 Tm 3:16).<\/p>\n<p>Alone among the writings of the NT, the Epistle to the Hebrews associates Christ’s ascension with his high priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. He who steadfastly withstood every earthly trial, having “passed through the heavens,” is fully able to empathize with his people and impart grace to the tempted and distraught (Heb 4:14ff.). Employing the symbolism of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary, the writer conceptualizes the Ascension as the event whereby Christ enters into the inner shrine behind the curtain (6:19), bringing with him his own blood (9:12), to the end that he might appear in the presence of God on our behalf (v 24).<\/p>\n<p>The NT thus attributes considerable theological significance to this phase of Christ’s exaltation. By virtue of his exaltation to the Father, Christ (1) demonstrated his defeat of every earthly enemy (Eph 4:8); (2) sent the promised Holy Spirit (Jn 16:7; Acts 2:33), which awaited his glorification (Jn 7:39); and (3) formally undertook his heavenly priestly ministry (Heb 6:20).<\/p>\n<p>The third stage of Christ’s exaltation is his heavenly enthronement at the right hand of the Father. Following his passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to the heavenly realm, Christ is represented in Scripture as having taken his seat at the Father’s right hand. The biblical phrase “right hand of God” (Acts 7:55-56), which has been preserved in many later Christian creeds and confessions, is an anthropomorphism that figuratively describes Christ’s universal dominion, authority, and power in the presence of the Father. This aspect of Christ’s exaltation represents the fulfillment of his prayer recorded in John 17:5: “Now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory I had with you before the world was made.”<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the description of God seated on the throne of the universe is a sign of his sovereignty (1 Kgs 22:19; Ps 99:1), majesty (Is 6:1-4) and holiness (Ps 47:8). That one should be invited to take a seat on the right hand of the sovereign in Eastern cultures was a token of extraordinary honor and authority (1 Kgs 2:19). The fact that the exalted Christ would be accorded this particular privilege was anticipated in the Scriptures of the OT (see Ps 8:5, quoted in Heb 2:8; and see Ps 110:1).<\/p>\n<p>The Epistle to the Hebrews, which shows unusual interest in the doctrine of Christ’s exaltation, represents Christ’s heavenly enthronement both as the sequel to his completed earthly sacrifice and as the commencement of his High Priestly ministration in the sanctuary on high. Affirming the superiority of Christ as High Priest of the new covenant, Hebrews 8:1-2 portrays Christ as seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the heavenlies. Christ’s enthronement affirms not only the finality of his earthly work of self-sacrifice but also his newly acquired status as mediator of the new and better covenant. Hebrews 10:11-18 pointedly contrasts the ineffectual sacrifices of the legal priests who <em>stand<\/em> in the performance of their ritual sacrifices with the effectual single sacrifice of Christ, who is now <em>seated<\/em> at the right hand of God as intercessor for the saints.<\/p>","summary_ro":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","summary_en":"EXALTATION OF CHRIST* The glory and dominion which Jesus attained subsequent to the completion of his earthly work of suffering and death. It is at one and the same time the consummation of his redemptive sacrifice and the reward of his full obedience to the will of the Father. The exaltation thus includes the biblical doctrines of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and heavenly enthronement. During his earthly ministry, Jesus predicted not only that he would suffer, die, and be buried (Mt 20:28...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":14581,"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":16959,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Humility","title_en":"Humility","content_ro":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>HUMILITY<\/h3>\n<p>A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute dependence upon God.<\/p>\n<p>In biblical literature there is not a clear distinction between humility and meekness or patience. In early stages of Israel’s history, the humble were identified as the poor, the afflicted, and the powerless. The Lord delivers the humble but brings down the proud (1 Sm 2:7; 2 Sm 22:28). Before the power and glory of God, the patriarch Abraham confessed that he was but dust and ashes (Gn 18:27). Israel began as a nation subjected to slavery and knew themselves as a people chosen not because of numerical strength or material wealth but because of God’s love (Dt 7:7-8). By attributing the source of all wealth and power to the Lord, those two major sources of human pride and arrogance are brought under control (cf. Jer 9:23-24).<\/p>\n<p>The humble poor are the constant concern of the Lord (Ex 23:6, 11; Dt 15:4, 7). Consequently, the humility of the poor became the symbol of the righteous God-fearer (Nm 12:3). In the development of the concept of humility in the OT, humility is nearly equated with righteousness and is identified, along with justice and mercy, as the requirement of God (Mi 6:8). In the Psalms particularly, “the afflicted” is almost a technical term for the righteous (Pss 22:26; 25:9; 147:6).<\/p>\n<p>In addition, humility is the appropriate response of the sinner in the presence of the holiness of God. The prophet Isaiah, confronted by the glory of God in the temple, cried, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man” (Is 6:5). Thus humility became more of a character trait than a term that reflected a state of material poverty or affliction. It became a concept reflective of the essence of piety and godliness expected of all people who have God as their Lord.<\/p>\n<p>Only rarely in the NT does humility refer to an objective condition of poverty, affliction, or oppression.The humility motif is developed in connection with Jesus as Messiah. The religious ideal of humility that the OT attributed to the coming King certainly applied to Jesus (Zec 9:9; cf. Mt 21:4-5). As Son of God, Jesus took no thought for himself but lived a life of obedience and trust in God the Father. The apostle Paul attributed to the incarnate Son of God a self-emptying by which he “humbled himself” and took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:5-8). Jesus’ character exhibited no pride or arrogance.<\/p>\n<p>Though bold in the face of hypocrisy and unflinching in his repudiation of pretentious religion, Jesus was “gentle and humble in heart” (Mt 11:29). He could, therefore, issue a severe warning against desire for status and openly rebuke the Pharisees for their violence against the poor and oppressed (Lk 14:11; Mt 23:12). At the same time, he was humble before those whose servant and helper he had become (Lk 22:27; Mk 10:45; Mt 20:28). The highest dignity of Jesus and his willingness to accept the cross in submission to the Father’s will are one. So his teaching on poverty of spirit rang true as a testimony of his own life. He ascribed all glory to his Father and lived in total dependence upon him (Jn 5:19; 6:38; 7:15; 8:28, 50; 14:10, 24). By washing his disciples’ feet, he assumed the role of servant with no loss of dignity or self-worth. And he set forth such service as a model of a life that finds happiness in preferring others over one’s self (Jn 13:1-20; Phil 2:1-4).<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, disciples of Jesus are also summoned to a life of humility. Turning their backs on status, security, and success, Christians seek an opportunity to gain themselves in serving others. Humility, thus, is the all-embracing life principle by which love seeks the good of others, and thus fulfills the law (cf. Rom 12:10; 13:8-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","summary_en":"HUMILITY A condition of lowliness or affliction in which one experiences a loss of power and prestige. Outside of biblical faith, humility in this sense would not usually be considered a virtue. Within the context of the Judeo-Christian tradition, however, humility is considered the proper attitude of human beings toward their Creator. Humility is a grateful and spontaneous awareness that life is a gift, and it is manifested as an ungrudging and unhypocritical acknowledgment of absolute depen...","source":"Articles\/H.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":24801,"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":32409,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Ransom","title_en":"Ransom","content_ro":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RANSOM<\/h3>\n<p>Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by payment of ransom (cf. Lv 25–27). Ransom involved a price paid as a substitute for that which was redeemed or set free.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses three different Hebrew words for ransom or redemption. Only when there is a clear indication of the payment of a price are these terms translated by “ransom.” But even when another term, such as “redemption,” is used in English translation, a ransom price is usually implied.<\/p>\n<p>One of the Hebrew terms (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span>) means a “cover” or a “covering.” It was a replacement payment made in exchange for punishment. A ransom could be paid to redeem the life of the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death (Ex 21:30). A half-shekel ransom price was required by God for each Israelite at census taking to prevent a plague (30:12), and this “atonement money” was an offering to the Lord for use in the tabernacle service. A murderer could not be ransomed, and anyone who found safety in a city of refuge could not be taken back by ransom (Nm 35:31-32). It was impossible to avoid death by paying a ransom (Ps 49:7-9). But in a few instances the term takes on the meaning of a “bribe” or “hush money” (1 Sm 12:3; Prv 6:35; Am 5:12).<\/p>\n<p>A second Hebrew word-family for “ransom” and “redemption” is related to <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span><em>.<\/em> <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">Go’el<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning a “reclaimant” or “redeemer,” derives from the root meaning of the Hebrew term “to restore, repair, deliver, rescue.” The term refers to God’s family-law regulations that place various obligations on a relative or kinsman (Lv 25:25-55). The kinsman had the right and duty of redeeming by ransom any family property that a person was compelled to sell (Lv 25:25-34; Ru 4:4-6); of ransoming a relative who was compelled by poverty to sell himself as a slave to a stranger or sojourner (Lv 25:47-55); and of acting as avenger of the blood of a dead relative, thus enforcing the claim for satisfaction for shedding his blood (Nm 35:19-27; Jos 20:3-5). The kinsman was also obligated to marry the wife of a dead brother who had died without leaving children so that the kinsman might raise up seed and the brother’s name not be forgotten in Israel (Ru 3:9-13; 4:1-12). In a general sense the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> was a “vindicator” or “redeemer”; a familiar example is Job’s cry for God to vindicate him (Jb 19:25). In the highest sense, God is the kinsman and <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> of Israel, redeeming them from the bondage of Egypt (Ex 6:5-7), from captivity in Babylon, and from distress in general (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> occurs 13 times in Is 40–46). Thus Israel is called “the ransomed of the Lord” (Is 35:10), having been “redeemed without money” (52:3). In such contexts, however, the cost is indicated in terms of God’s might and power.<\/p>\n<p>The OT uses a third Hebrew word (<span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">pidyon<\/span>) from the area of commercial law for ransom or payment. Since God spared the firstborn in Israel at the time of Passover, the first offspring of every womb belonged to God, and the oldest male was redeemed by ransom (Ex 13:12-15; 34:20; Lv 27:27; Nm 18:15-17). Later the entire tribe of Levi was set aside as priestly substitutes for the firstborn. Since there were 273 more firstborn than Levites, a payment of five shekels was paid in ransom for each (Nm 3:40-46). This term was also used for the price paid to ransom a slave from slavery (Dt 15:15; 24:18); a slave concubine could also be ransomed (Ex 21:8-11; Lv 19:20). God motivates these provisions by his own ransoming of Israel as slaves in Egypt (Dt 15:15; 24:18). This Hebrew term is also applied to God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Dt 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 2 Sm 7:23; 1 Chr 17:21; Ps 78:42) and from Babylonian captivity (Is 35:10; 51:11). Sometimes God ransoms without reference to a specific occasion (Hos 7:13; cf. Dt 21:8; Neh 1:10; Is 1:27; Jer 31:11). God also ransoms from the grave (Hos 13:14), from iniquities (Ps 130:8), and from troubles (25:22). This deliverance always implies some sort of payment or cost, such as “the mighty power” or “strong hand” of God needed for the redemption.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>In the NT there is just one family of words used for ransom. The term basically means “to loose” or “to set free.” It denotes releasing, redeeming, or liberating on payment of the ransom price. The translation “ransom” is restricted to approximately eight instances where there is a clear reference to the payment of some sort of price. The translators of the Septuagint restricted their use of this Greek word to those instances where the three Hebrew terms clearly meant ransom payment.<\/p>\n<p>The most important occurrence in the NT is Jesus’ description of his death “as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Three features stand out in Jesus’ words: his service is one of ransom; his self-sacrifice is the ransom price; and his ransom is substitutionary in character. “He gave his life to purchase freedom for everyone” (1 Tm 2:6). Jesus Christ “gave his life to free us from every kind of sin” (Ti 2:14). The ransom price was “the precious blood of Christ,” who was an unblemished lamb (1 Pt 1:18-19), thus linking Christ’s self-sacrifice to the sacrifices of the OT that pointed to him. The blood of goats and calves was not able to save, but an eternal redemption was obtained by Christ’s blood (Heb 9:12). In heaven the redeemed sing the new song to the Lamb whose blood ransomed them (Rv 5:9; cf. 14:3-4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Redeemer, Redemption.<\/p>","summary_ro":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","summary_en":"RANSOM Price for redeeming or liberating slaves, captives, property, or life. Jesus described his entire ministry as one of service in giving his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). Hence, “ransom” is closely linked to such terms as “redemption” and “salvation,” to the satisfaction Christ made in atonement for sin. In the Old Testament In the OT God provided various regulations for his covenant people whereby life and property could be “redeemed,” “bought back,” or “set free” by p...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32528,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Reconciliation","title_en":"Reconciliation","content_ro":"<h3>RECONCILIATION<\/h3>\n<p>Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of sinners appropriating this free gift by faith; the promised forgiveness and salvation that become the sinners’ possession by grace; and finally reconciliation with God (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalassein<\/span> (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19) signifies first of all the reconciliation of God with the world, expressing God’s initial change of heart toward sinners. The problem is not rightly addressed by questioning whether the unchanging God ever changes his mind; the situation rather is one where an altered relationship now exists between God and sinners by Christ’s interposing sacrifice on behalf of fallen humanity. The point of the reconciliation is that God, for Christ’s sake, now feels toward sinners as though they had never offended him. The reconciliation is complete and perfect, covering mankind both extensively and intensively—that is, all sinners and all sin. The cause of rupture between God and sinners has now been healed, a truth wholly independent of humanity’s mood or attitude. While sinners were still the objects of God’s just wrath, Christ, in full harmony with the gracious will of his heavenly Father, interposed himself for their sakes, for the restoration of harmony.<\/p>\n<p>So basic is this truth that without objective reconciliation there is no thought of salvation, of regeneration, of faith, of Christian life. The initiative in reconciliation, moreover, is all on God’s side; through his Word, the gospel, God reveals to sinners that he is fully reconciled with them because of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The vicarious atonement or redemption of Christ underlies God’s reconciling activity. Reconciliation took place not by God’s exercise of divine fiat or decree of power but through Christ interposing himself as the people’s substitute for the law’s condemnation. Thus the vicarious atonement is the key to understanding reconciliation as scripturally conceived and taught. Christ “became sin for us”; he assumed the full obligations of the law, perfectly fulfilling it and fully bearing the guilt and punishment. Sins and guilt were laid on him; his righteousness attained under the law was imputed to mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The human predicament, simply and precisely, was the human inability to change or rectify in any way the broken, hostile relationship existing between humanity and God. Christ was the bridge. To carry out his substitutionary mission was the purpose of his incarnation. His sacrificial suffering and death, sealed by his triumphant resurrection, achieved mankind’s redemption (Rom 4:25). Christ suffered death not as the common lot of all people but as the wages of sin.<\/p>\n<p>His vicarious satisfaction for all sins is the central teaching of the Scripture. Everything literally depends upon the fact that the turning point for humanity came from God, who was working out reconciliation with the world through Christ. This is not simply an imagined or piously conceived idea, something presented as true by deeply concerned and thoughtful people, but a reality that happened (Is 53:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 9:12-14; 1 Pt 1:19). It was God’s solution for the grievous, hostile state that existed between a righteous, angry God and sinful, offending people.<\/p>\n<p>The Scripture never loses sight of the sweeping extent of Christ’s work, the atonement for the sins of all people (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2). Christ is the sinners’ shield from and before the just wrath of God. Nor was it merely by God’s accepting it as sufficient that Christ’s atonement availed; it was in fact and in truth the adequate and full payment (Mt 20:28; Rom 3:25; Heb 7:26-28; 1 Tm 2:6; 1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel, therefore, is the message that informs the sinner of God’s reconciliation with sinners through Christ and powerfully persuades the sinner to accept this truth in faith, or as the apostle Paul puts it: “For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. This is the wonderful message he has given us to tell others. We are Christ’s ambassadors, and God is using us to speak to you. We urge you, as though Christ himself were here pleading with you, ‘Be reconciled to God!’ ” (2 Cor 5:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>RECONCILIATION<\/h3>\n<p>Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of sinners appropriating this free gift by faith; the promised forgiveness and salvation that become the sinners’ possession by grace; and finally reconciliation with God (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:16).<\/p>\n<p>The term <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">katalassein<\/span> (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19) signifies first of all the reconciliation of God with the world, expressing God’s initial change of heart toward sinners. The problem is not rightly addressed by questioning whether the unchanging God ever changes his mind; the situation rather is one where an altered relationship now exists between God and sinners by Christ’s interposing sacrifice on behalf of fallen humanity. The point of the reconciliation is that God, for Christ’s sake, now feels toward sinners as though they had never offended him. The reconciliation is complete and perfect, covering mankind both extensively and intensively—that is, all sinners and all sin. The cause of rupture between God and sinners has now been healed, a truth wholly independent of humanity’s mood or attitude. While sinners were still the objects of God’s just wrath, Christ, in full harmony with the gracious will of his heavenly Father, interposed himself for their sakes, for the restoration of harmony.<\/p>\n<p>So basic is this truth that without objective reconciliation there is no thought of salvation, of regeneration, of faith, of Christian life. The initiative in reconciliation, moreover, is all on God’s side; through his Word, the gospel, God reveals to sinners that he is fully reconciled with them because of Christ.<\/p>\n<p>The vicarious atonement or redemption of Christ underlies God’s reconciling activity. Reconciliation took place not by God’s exercise of divine fiat or decree of power but through Christ interposing himself as the people’s substitute for the law’s condemnation. Thus the vicarious atonement is the key to understanding reconciliation as scripturally conceived and taught. Christ “became sin for us”; he assumed the full obligations of the law, perfectly fulfilling it and fully bearing the guilt and punishment. Sins and guilt were laid on him; his righteousness attained under the law was imputed to mankind.<\/p>\n<p>The human predicament, simply and precisely, was the human inability to change or rectify in any way the broken, hostile relationship existing between humanity and God. Christ was the bridge. To carry out his substitutionary mission was the purpose of his incarnation. His sacrificial suffering and death, sealed by his triumphant resurrection, achieved mankind’s redemption (Rom 4:25). Christ suffered death not as the common lot of all people but as the wages of sin.<\/p>\n<p>His vicarious satisfaction for all sins is the central teaching of the Scripture. Everything literally depends upon the fact that the turning point for humanity came from God, who was working out reconciliation with the world through Christ. This is not simply an imagined or piously conceived idea, something presented as true by deeply concerned and thoughtful people, but a reality that happened (Is 53:6; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 9:12-14; 1 Pt 1:19). It was God’s solution for the grievous, hostile state that existed between a righteous, angry God and sinful, offending people.<\/p>\n<p>The Scripture never loses sight of the sweeping extent of Christ’s work, the atonement for the sins of all people (Jn 3:16; 1 Jn 2:2). Christ is the sinners’ shield from and before the just wrath of God. Nor was it merely by God’s accepting it as sufficient that Christ’s atonement availed; it was in fact and in truth the adequate and full payment (Mt 20:28; Rom 3:25; Heb 7:26-28; 1 Tm 2:6; 1 Jn 2:2).<\/p>\n<p>The gospel, therefore, is the message that informs the sinner of God’s reconciliation with sinners through Christ and powerfully persuades the sinner to accept this truth in faith, or as the apostle Paul puts it: “For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people’s sins against them. This is the wonderful message he has given us to tell others. We are Christ’s ambassadors, and God is using us to speak to you. We urge you, as though Christ himself were here pleading with you, ‘Be reconciled to God!’ ” (2 Cor 5:19-20, <span>nlt<\/span>).<\/p>","summary_ro":"RECONCILIATION Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of si...","summary_en":"RECONCILIATION Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where there had previously been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily, it also includes the removal of the offense that caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of si...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":32562,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Redemption Redeemer","title_en":"Redemption Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>REDEEMER, REDEMPTION<\/h3>\n<p>English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentandNewTestamentWords\">Old Testament and New Testament Words<\/p>\n<p>For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the particular situation, that convey the idea of redemption. The meaning of these redemptive terms rests on legal, social, and religious customs that are foreign to modern culture. An understanding of the culture is needed for an understanding of the terminology and its use.<\/p>\n<p>The first term used for redemption has a legal context. The verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">padah<\/span> is used when an animal substitutes for (or redeems) a person or another animal. The noun derived from the root means the ransom or the the price paid. When a living being, person or animal, requires redemption, the substitution must be made, or price paid; otherwise, the creature involved is killed (Ex 13:13; 34:20). However, there is evidence that this rule was not always strictly followed (Ex 21:8; Jb 6:23).<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption had special significance for the firstborn. The firstborn male, both man and beast, belonged to God. In theory the firstborn was sacrificed to him. This was done in the case of many animals, but the human firstborn and some animals were redeemed (Ex 13:13; 34:20; Nm 18:15-16). In the redemption of the firstborn son, an animal was substituted, although later a sum of money was paid (Nm 18:16).<\/p>\n<p>The second term involved is the Hebrew root <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ga’al<\/span><em>,<\/em> which is used primarily in relation to family rules and obligations, the laws governing family property rights and duties. For example, should a piece of property be lost by a family member, the next of kin had both the right and the obligation to redeem this property. This right of redemption protected the family inheritance. The noun derived from this root is equivalent to the English root “redemption,” and the person who buys back the property is the <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> or redeemer.<\/p>\n<p>An Israelite who was forced to sell himself into slavery to pay his debts could be redeemed by a near relative or even by himself (Lv 25:47-49). Land might also be redeemed in the same fashion (25:25-28; Jer 32:6-9).<\/p>\n<p>The right of redemption extended also to persons in special circumstances. The obligation of a man to marry his brother’s widow is well known. In the book of Ruth, the right of redemption is extended to a distant relative. In this story, Boaz redeemed not only the property but Ruth as well, and she became his wife (Ru 3:13; 4:1-6).<\/p>\n<p>The third term used in Hebrew is the root verb <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kaphar<\/span><em>,<\/em> which means “to cover.” From this root come the terms meaning to cover sin, atone, or expiate. The noun derived, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">kopher<\/span><em>,<\/em> means the price paid to cover sin, when the term is used in the religious sense.<\/p>\n<p>The term is used to mean the payment made for any life that should be forfeited. A good illustration is the price paid by the owner of an ox that had gored a person to death. Under the law, the owner’s life was forfeited, but he could redeem himself by paying the required ransom (Ex 21:28-32).<\/p>\n<p>All three terms are translated by the same Greek verb, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">luo<\/span><em>,<\/em> meaning “to loose.” The noun <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">lutron<\/span> (ransom), is used for all three terms on occasion. This indicates that while the Hebrew used different words for different situations, the same essential meaning of redemption was involved in all situations. The concept of redeeming or freeing was of primary concern.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"GodasRedeemer\">God as Redeemer<\/p>\n<p>In the OT the object of God’s redemption is generally the people as a whole, or the nation, rather than individuals. The beginning of this concept of national redemption is seen in God’s freeing the people from slavery in Egypt. Though they were in bondage, their God ransomed them (Ex 6:6; Dt 15:15).<\/p>\n<p>As indicated by the terms used for redeeming or ransoming, the payment of a set price or the substitution of another life was involved. When the redemptive concept is applied to God as the subject, he delivers—without the payment of a price—by his might or power: “I am the <span>Lord<\/span>, and I will free you from your slavery in Egypt. I will redeem you with mighty power and great acts of judgment” (Ex 6:6, <span>nlt<\/span>; cf. Dt 15:15). The same thought is carried forward in other times of need and deliverance, such as the time of exile. God is the national deliverer (e.g., Is 29:22; 35:10; 43:1; 44:22; Jer 31:11).<\/p>\n<p>Again there is no suggestion that God paid a price to free his people. God redeems by his own power. “For this is what the <span>Lord<\/span> says: ‘When I sold you into exile, I received no payment. Now I can redeem you without paying for you’ ” (Is 52:3, <span>nlt<\/span>). When Cyrus let the people free, it was again without payment of a price (45:13).<\/p>\n<p>In the Christian community, especially in the early centuries of the church, there arose the idea that a ransom price was needed to pay for sins. In fact, it was often taught that the sinner was, in effect, held captive by Satan. Christ’s death was the ransom price paid by God to Satan to free sinful people. This teaching is not supported by Scripture. The death of Christ is an atonement or expiation made for sin, but this does not mean that his death was a price paid to Satan. God is not pictured anywhere in Scripture as getting into such a commercial transaction with Satan. The redeeming work of the cross must always lie within the realm of divine mystery.<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"RedemptionandtheMessiah\">Redemption and the Messiah<\/p>\n<p>In the OT redemption is closely linked with the messianic hope. From the time of the exodus on, God is revealed as deliverer. The hope of redemption is very strong during the Captivity. The prophets constantly speak of God as redeemer or deliverer. This hope was to be fulfilled ultimately through God’s anointed one, or Messiah, who would be of the line of David (Is 9:1-6; 11:1-9; Jer 23:5-6).<\/p>\n<p>The messianic hope grew stronger during the periods of exile and persecution. In fact, during the long centuries of persecution, this hope of a messianic deliverer was stronger than ever. This period, generally called the intertestamental period, lasted about four centuries and extended from the last of the prophets until the time of John the Baptist and Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>Christians believe that in Jesus the Christ (or Jesus the Messiah) we see the fulfillment of the OT redemptive concept. The redemptive image is very evident in the Gospels. John the Baptist depicted Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of God’s redemptive kingdom (Mt 3:12) and hence, the Messiah of Israel. Jesus, the Son of Man, came to give himself as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). The work of the Messiah was vicarious and substitutionary.<\/p>\n<p>The same thought occurs especially in the writings of Paul. Christ is the sin offering to the Father (Rom 3:25). Redemption is by the giving of his life (Acts 20:28) for a purchased people (1 Pt 2:9; see also 1 Cor 7:22-24; 2 Cor 5:14-17). These are all words or expressions used to present the central idea of redemption or atonement. Jesus Christ is the one who in himself fulfilled the redemption concept of Scripture and by his sacrifice provided for the redemption of sinners.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of redemption has deep meaning for God’s people. In the OT it illustrates the truth that God is the Savior of his covenant people. Although Israel fell into sin by denying God’s law, God did not destroy them but restored them to favor upon repentance.<\/p>\n<p>In the prophets, especially, God’s redemptive work was to be completed through the Messiah and his redemptive sacrifice. The followers of Jesus believed that he was the Messiah who would provide redemption for the whole world. Coupled with the idea of redemption is the motivating force of divine love as the basis for restoration (Jn 3:16). The one who believes will be freed from the bondage of sin and find favor again with his redeeming God.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Atonement; Ransom; Salvation.<\/p>","summary_ro":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","summary_en":"REDEEMER, REDEMPTION English words derived from a Latin root meaning “to buy back,” thus meaning the liberation of any possession, object, or person, usually by payment of a ransom. In Greek the root word means “to loose” and so to free. The term is used of freeing from chains, slavery, or prison. Old Testament and New Testament Words For a full understanding of the concept of redemption, it is necessary to look at the OT. There are three different words used in Hebrew, depending on the parti...","source":"Articles\/R.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35871,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Son of Man","title_en":"Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SON OF MAN<\/h3>\n<p>Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory.<\/p>\n<p>The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. The book of Ezekiel is the general source, since this prophet was referred to as “son of man” 90 times. For example, God addressed him, “Son of man, stand upon your feet, and I will speak with you” (Ez 2:1, <span>rsv<\/span>). Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man” and numerous themes from Ezekiel suggest his desire to identify himself as the eschatological prophet who, like Ezekiel (chs 4, 7, 10, 22, 40–48), had the last word about the destruction of Jerusalem and the restoration of the kingdom of God to Israel (Mt 23–24; Acts 1:6-8).<\/p>\n<p>The specific source of the term is Daniel 7:13-14, with its vision of one “like a son of man” who “comes with the clouds” into the presence of “the Ancient of Days,” who gives him the universal and eternal kingdom of God. Jesus repeatedly quoted parts of this text in teaching about his second coming (Mt 16:27; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64). Clearly, Jesus understood this passage as a prophetic portrayal of his own person: his incarnation, ascension, and inheritance of the kingdom of God.<\/p>\n<p>In the Gospels, the term “Son of Man” is used by Jesus about 80 times as a mysterious, indirect way of speaking about himself (Mt, 32 times; Mk, 14 times; Lk, 26 times; Jn, 10 times). In all these texts, Jesus was always the speaker, and no one ever addressed him as “Son of Man.” In some texts the reference is cryptic enough for some interpreters to insist that Jesus was speaking about another person. Such uncertainty is recorded in only one text in John, where the crowd asks Jesus, “Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (Jn 12:34). In most texts, the identification is clear. In some it is explicit: “Who do men say that the Son of Man is?”—followed by, “Who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:13, 15). The conclusion generally drawn is that Jesus used the term as a messianic title for himself, so that he could speak modestly about his person and mission yet convey the exalted content he wished to reveal about himself. He could do this with considerable originality because the term was not fraught with popular misconceptions concerning the Messiah.<\/p>\n<p>The term occurs only four other times in the NT. In Acts 7:56, Stephen says, “Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing in the place of honor at God’s right hand!” (<span>nlt<\/span>). Hebrews 2:6 quotes Psalm 8:4 as applying to Jesus. Finally, Revelation 1:13 and 14:14 record visions of someone “like a son of man,” who is undoubtedly the glorified Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>In the synoptic Gospels, the first theme in Jesus’ self-revelation connected with his use of the title “Son of Man” concerns his coming to earth to accomplish his messianic mission. A general comparison of Jesus’ present earthly condition with that of his previous heavenly glory is expressed in the saying “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; see Lk 9:58). This saying indicates that the Son of Man gave up his heavenly home to suffer all the humiliations of his earthly ministry (Phil 2:5-11).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus used the title to claim divine prerogatives, saying, “The Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath” (Mt 12:8; Mk 2:28; Lk 6:5). The Sabbath, a divine institution, may not be revised by ordinary men. But since Jesus is the Son of Man from heaven, he is free to rule as Lord even of the Sabbath, because he is the same Lord who instituted the Sabbath (Gn 2:2; Ex 20:8-11). After healing the paralytic at Capernaum, Jesus claimed that “the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” (Mt 9:6; Mk 2:10; Lk 5:24). Previously, forgiveness of sins came from heaven and from God, but now forgiveness comes from Capernaum and is given by Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>The second aspect of Jesus’ use of the “Son of Man” title concerns his suffering, death, and glorious resurrection as the mysterious method he would use to fulfill his earthly mission as the Son of Man. Jesus began expounding this passion theme after Peter confessed him to be Messiah and Son of God (Mt 16:16). Jesus’ prediction of his passion as the Son of Man begins in Mark 8:31-32 and is repeated in several other texts. The Gospels expand the theme to include his suffering of mockery and scourging (Mt 17:12; 20:18; Mk 8:31; Lk 9:22), betrayal by Judas (Mt 17:22; 26:24-25; Mk 14:21, 41), rejection by the Jewish leaders (Mt 20:18), death by crucifixion (Mt 20:19; Mk 9:12, 31; 10:33), burial for three days (Mt 12:40; Lk 11:30), and resurrection (Mt 17:22-23; Mk 8:31).<\/p>\n<p>In the famous text “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45), Jesus teaches that his death was a vicarious sacrifice for the salvation of his people. This idea of substitutionary atonement is a new element in the Son of Man material and derives from Jesus’ understanding of himself as the suffering Servant of the Lord (Is 53).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus also used the “Son of Man” title to teach about his second coming. As the Son of Man, Jesus will return to earth from heaven in the glory of his Father with the angels (Mt 16:27; Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). First, he will be seated at the right hand of God, and then he will come again (Mt 26:64; Mk 14:62; Lk 22:69) with the clouds (Mt 24:30; Mk 13:26; Lk 21:27). This coming will be unexpected (Mt 24:27; Lk 12:40), like a flash of lightning or the flood of Noah (Mt 24:37; Lk 17:24). His coming will be for the gathering of the elect, the judgment of all the nations of the earth (Mt 19:28; 25:32), and the restoration of final righteousness in the world (19:28; 25:46).<\/p>\n<p>In these passages, Jesus’ focus shifts from the provisional victory in his passion and resurrection to the final victory of the Son of Man at his second coming. Here again, the dramatic emphasis is on the heavenly origin and divine prerogatives of the Son of Man. This man Jesus, the Son of Man, will be the final judge (cf. Acts 17:31).<\/p>\n<p>The Gospel of John has its own distinctive material concerning the Son of Man. The angels are said to ascend and descend on the Son of Man (Jn 1:51), thereby signifying that he is a preexistent person who has come from heaven to earth (3:13; 6:62). His being lifted up (by crucifixion) will bring about eternal life for all who believe in him (3:14). The Son of Man (3:14) is also the Son of God (3:16), God’s one and only Son (1:18; 3:18). Quite simply, in John’s Gospel, the “Son of Man” title is equivalent to the title “Son of God.” It reveals his divinity, preexistence, heavenly origin, and divine prerogatives. It affirms his present earthly condition for revelation and passion, and his future eschatological glory. The Father has given the Son of Man authority to raise the dead and to judge the world (5:25-27).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Christology; Jesus Christ, Teachings of; Messiah; Son of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","summary_en":"SON OF MAN Messianic title used by Jesus to express his heavenly origin, earthly mission, and glorious future coming. It does not refer merely to his human nature or humanity, as some church fathers or contemporary scholars believe. Rather, it reflects on the heavenly origin and divine dignity of Jesus, on the mystery of his manifestation in human form, and on his earthly mission that took him to the cross and then into glory. The background of the term “Son of Man” is to be found in the OT. ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":35979,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Soul","title_en":"Soul","content_ro":"<h3>SOUL<\/h3>\n<p>Term translating the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> and the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Gnosticism also taught that the body was the prison house of the soul. Redemption comes to those initiated into the Gnostic secrets, leading to the release of the soul from the body.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical thought about the soul is different. In the OT the soul signifies that which is vital to humans in the broadest sense. The Hebrew and Greek words for soul often can be translated as “life”; occasionally, they can be used for the life of creatures (Gn 1:20; Lv 11:10). “Soul for soul” means “life for life” (Ex 21:23). In legal writings, a soul refers to a person in relation to a particular law (e.g., “If a soul shall sin . . . ,” Lv 4:2, <span>kjv<\/span>). When people were counted, they were counted as souls, that is, persons (Ex 1:5; Dt 10:22).<\/p>\n<p>In a narrower sense, the soul denotes human emotions and inner powers. People are called to love God with all their heart and soul (Dt 13:3). Knowledge and understanding (Ps 139:14), thought (1 Sm 20:3), love (1 Sm 18:1), and memory (Lam 3:20) all originate in the soul. Here the soul comes close to what today would be called the self, one’s person, personality, or ego.<\/p>\n<p>There is no suggestion in the OT of the transmigration of the soul as an immaterial, immortal entity. Man is a unity of body and soul—terms that describe not so much two separate entities in a person as much as one person from different standpoints. Hence, in the description of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7, the phrase “a living soul” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is better translated as “a living being.” The thought is not that men and women became <em>souls,<\/em> for clearly they had bodies. The use of the word in the original draws attention to the vital aspect of humans as “living beings.” The Hebrew view of the unity of the person may help to explain why people in the OT had only a shadowy view of life after death, for it would be difficult to conceive how people could exist without a body (Pss 16:10; 49:15; 88:3-12). Where hope of an afterlife exists, it is not because of the intrinsic character of the soul itself (as in Plato). It is grounded in confidence in the God who has power over death and the belief that communion with him cannot be broken even by death (Ex 3:6; 1 Sm 2:6; Jb 19:25-26; Pss 16:10-11; 73:24-25; Is 25:8; 26:19; Dn 12:2; Hos 6:1-3; 13:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the word for soul (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span>) has a range of meanings similar to that in the OT. Often it is synonymous with life itself. Followers of Jesus are said to have risked their lives (souls) for his sake (Acts 15:26; cf. Jn 13:37; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30). As the Son of Man, Jesus came not to be served but to serve and to give his life (soul) as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). As the Good Shepherd, he lays down his life (soul) for the sheep (Jn 10:14, 17-18). In Luke 14:26 the condition of discipleship is to hate one’s soul, that is, to be willing to deny oneself to the point of losing one’s life for Christ’s sake (cf. Lk 9:23; Rv 12:11).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently “soul” can mean “person” (Acts 2:43; 3:23; 7:14; Rom 2:9; 13:1; 1 Pt 3:20). The expression “every living soul” (Rv 16:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) reflects the vital aspect of living beings. As in the OT, the soul can denote not only the vital aspect of the person on the physical level, but it can also connote one’s emotional energies. It denotes the person himself, the seat of his or her emotions, one’s inmost being. For example, when Jesus was agonizing about his death, he spoke of his soul being crushed (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34; cf. Ps 42:6). In an entirely different setting, Jesus promised rest to the souls of those who come to him (Mt 11:29). Here, as elsewhere, “soul” denotes the essential person (cf. Lk 2:35; 2 Cor 1:23; 2 Thes 2:8; 3 Jn 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Several passages place the soul alongside the spirit. Luke 1:46 is probably a case of Hebrew poetic parallelism, which expresses the same idea in two different ways. Both terms denote Mary as a person in the depths of her being. Similarly, in Hebrews 4:12, dividing the soul and the spirit is a graphic way of saying how the Word of God probes the inmost recesses of our being. The prayer in 1 Thessalonians 5:23—that the readers may be kept blameless in spirit, soul, and body—is a way of speaking of the whole being. Here soul probably suggests physical existence, as in Genesis 2:7 and 1 Corinthians 2:14, whereas spirit may imply the higher or “spiritual” side of life.<\/p>\n<p>In other passages, the emotions, the will, and even the mind come to the fore, though in each case there is the accompanying idea of a person’s inmost being. People are to love God with all the soul (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; cf. Dt 6:5). The expression “from the soul” (Eph 6:6; Col 3:23) means “from the heart,” with all one’s being. In Philippians 1:27 believers are called to be of one mind (cf. Acts 4:32; 14:2). Passages that speak of the soul in relation to salvation include Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5; Hebrews 6:19; 10:39; 12:3; 13:7; James 1:21; 5:20; 1 Peter 1:9, 22-23; 2:25; 4:19; and Revelation 6:9; 20:4. Such passages speak of the soul either to stress the essential human being, as distinct from the physical body, or to express man’s continued existence with God prior to the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Spirit of Man.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SOUL<\/h3>\n<p>Term translating the Greek word <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span> and the Hebrew <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">nephesh<\/span><em>.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century <span>BC<\/span>) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Gnosticism also taught that the body was the prison house of the soul. Redemption comes to those initiated into the Gnostic secrets, leading to the release of the soul from the body.<\/p>\n<p>Biblical thought about the soul is different. In the OT the soul signifies that which is vital to humans in the broadest sense. The Hebrew and Greek words for soul often can be translated as “life”; occasionally, they can be used for the life of creatures (Gn 1:20; Lv 11:10). “Soul for soul” means “life for life” (Ex 21:23). In legal writings, a soul refers to a person in relation to a particular law (e.g., “If a soul shall sin . . . ,” Lv 4:2, <span>kjv<\/span>). When people were counted, they were counted as souls, that is, persons (Ex 1:5; Dt 10:22).<\/p>\n<p>In a narrower sense, the soul denotes human emotions and inner powers. People are called to love God with all their heart and soul (Dt 13:3). Knowledge and understanding (Ps 139:14), thought (1 Sm 20:3), love (1 Sm 18:1), and memory (Lam 3:20) all originate in the soul. Here the soul comes close to what today would be called the self, one’s person, personality, or ego.<\/p>\n<p>There is no suggestion in the OT of the transmigration of the soul as an immaterial, immortal entity. Man is a unity of body and soul—terms that describe not so much two separate entities in a person as much as one person from different standpoints. Hence, in the description of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7, the phrase “a living soul” (<span>kjv<\/span>) is better translated as “a living being.” The thought is not that men and women became <em>souls,<\/em> for clearly they had bodies. The use of the word in the original draws attention to the vital aspect of humans as “living beings.” The Hebrew view of the unity of the person may help to explain why people in the OT had only a shadowy view of life after death, for it would be difficult to conceive how people could exist without a body (Pss 16:10; 49:15; 88:3-12). Where hope of an afterlife exists, it is not because of the intrinsic character of the soul itself (as in Plato). It is grounded in confidence in the God who has power over death and the belief that communion with him cannot be broken even by death (Ex 3:6; 1 Sm 2:6; Jb 19:25-26; Pss 16:10-11; 73:24-25; Is 25:8; 26:19; Dn 12:2; Hos 6:1-3; 13:14).<\/p>\n<p>In the NT the word for soul (<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">psuche<\/span>) has a range of meanings similar to that in the OT. Often it is synonymous with life itself. Followers of Jesus are said to have risked their lives (souls) for his sake (Acts 15:26; cf. Jn 13:37; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30). As the Son of Man, Jesus came not to be served but to serve and to give his life (soul) as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). As the Good Shepherd, he lays down his life (soul) for the sheep (Jn 10:14, 17-18). In Luke 14:26 the condition of discipleship is to hate one’s soul, that is, to be willing to deny oneself to the point of losing one’s life for Christ’s sake (cf. Lk 9:23; Rv 12:11).<\/p>\n<p>Frequently “soul” can mean “person” (Acts 2:43; 3:23; 7:14; Rom 2:9; 13:1; 1 Pt 3:20). The expression “every living soul” (Rv 16:3, <span>kjv<\/span>) reflects the vital aspect of living beings. As in the OT, the soul can denote not only the vital aspect of the person on the physical level, but it can also connote one’s emotional energies. It denotes the person himself, the seat of his or her emotions, one’s inmost being. For example, when Jesus was agonizing about his death, he spoke of his soul being crushed (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34; cf. Ps 42:6). In an entirely different setting, Jesus promised rest to the souls of those who come to him (Mt 11:29). Here, as elsewhere, “soul” denotes the essential person (cf. Lk 2:35; 2 Cor 1:23; 2 Thes 2:8; 3 Jn 1:2).<\/p>\n<p>Several passages place the soul alongside the spirit. Luke 1:46 is probably a case of Hebrew poetic parallelism, which expresses the same idea in two different ways. Both terms denote Mary as a person in the depths of her being. Similarly, in Hebrews 4:12, dividing the soul and the spirit is a graphic way of saying how the Word of God probes the inmost recesses of our being. The prayer in 1 Thessalonians 5:23—that the readers may be kept blameless in spirit, soul, and body—is a way of speaking of the whole being. Here soul probably suggests physical existence, as in Genesis 2:7 and 1 Corinthians 2:14, whereas spirit may imply the higher or “spiritual” side of life.<\/p>\n<p>In other passages, the emotions, the will, and even the mind come to the fore, though in each case there is the accompanying idea of a person’s inmost being. People are to love God with all the soul (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; cf. Dt 6:5). The expression “from the soul” (Eph 6:6; Col 3:23) means “from the heart,” with all one’s being. In Philippians 1:27 believers are called to be of one mind (cf. Acts 4:32; 14:2). Passages that speak of the soul in relation to salvation include Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5; Hebrews 6:19; 10:39; 12:3; 13:7; James 1:21; 5:20; 1 Peter 1:9, 22-23; 2:25; 4:19; and Revelation 6:9; 20:4. Such passages speak of the soul either to stress the essential human being, as distinct from the physical body, or to express man’s continued existence with God prior to the resurrection.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Man; Spirit of Man.<\/p>","summary_ro":"SOUL Term translating the Greek word psuche and the Hebrew nephesh. The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century BC) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of ...","summary_en":"SOUL Term translating the Greek word psuche and the Hebrew nephesh. The Greek philosopher Plato (fourth century BC) perceived the soul as the eternal element in humans; whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of ...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54892,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","summary_en":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82518,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","summary_en":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110144,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","summary_en":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137770,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:28","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:28","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:28<\/strong> This expression, the <em>Son of Man came<\/em><em>,<\/em> suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as <em>a ransom for many<\/em>, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","summary_en":"20:28 This expression, the Son of Man came, suggests Jesus’ preexistence (see Dan 7:13-14). • Jesus was describing his voluntary offering of himself as a ransom for many, to pay the debt all people owe (see Matt 26:26-29; Isa 53:10-12; Rom 3:24), thereby buying them out of slavery (see Gal 5:1).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":60327,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61077,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":64962,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":87953,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88703,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":92588,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":115579,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116329,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":120214,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143205,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Passover","title_en":"The Passover","content_ro":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Passover<\/h3>\n<p>The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate only unleavened bread, just as they had done in their hurried departure from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p>In that first Passover, a lamb was sacrificed that took the place of the firstborn son of every family of Israel (Exod 12:12-13, 23). Passover thus carries the notion that we can be delivered from death only by means of a sacrifice that takes our place. But while Passover marked an event of tremendous significance in Israelite history, the events of the Exodus did not conquer the universal, fundamental problem of death, a problem that stems from sin (1 Cor 15:56).<\/p>\n<p>Many years later, around the time of the Passover festival, Jesus Christ gave his life as “a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45) and became “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). While sharing a final Passover meal with his disciples, Jesus spoke of the symbolic nature of the wine they shared: “This is my blood, which confirms the covenant. . . . It is poured out as a sacrifice to forgive the sins of many” (Matt 26:28). He embodies and enacts a new Passover: Through his sacrifice, sin and death were fully and finally defeated (see also Isa 25:7-8).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Exod 12:1-51; Lev 23:4-8; Num 9:1-14; 28:16-25; Deut 16:1-7; Matt 26:17-30; Luke 22:15-20; 1 Cor 5:6-8<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","summary_en":"The Passover The festival of Passover became a central feature of Israelite religious practice. This festival, which celebrated God’s deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt and his sparing of them from the final, deadly plague, was to be commemorated on an annual basis, in accorance with the instructions given in Exodus (Exod 12:1-27). Passover was to serve as a reminder across the generations of God’s saving activity. As such, it was an enacted, participatory festival, in which the people ate...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":143955,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Family Redeemer","title_en":"The Family Redeemer","content_ro":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Family Redeemer<\/h3>\n<p>The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">go’el<\/span> is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24).<\/p>\n<p>According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel:<\/p>\n<p>1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a family member was to pay off the debt so the land would remain in the family. If no relative could purchase the land and the seller was unable to buy it back, the land still reverted to the seller or his heirs in the Jubilee (fiftieth) Year. Two examples of family redeemers buying land for their relatives are Boaz (Ruth 4:1-12) and Jeremiah (Jer 32:6-15).<\/p>\n<p>2. Similarly, if an Israelite became so poor he had to sell himself into debt-slavery, a family redeemer was to buy his relative from service to a non-relative (Lev 25:35-55). The poor Israelite would pay off his debt by working for his relative, who could be expected to treat him better than a stranger would.<\/p>\n<p>3. The family redeemer was to pursue justice for an Israelite killed by another’s hand, under conditions described in Num 35:9-34.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of the family redeemer reminds us that God is the true owner of all things, and he commands us to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:18; Matt 22:39-40). The New Testament presents Jesus as the perfect family redeemer, buying us from the slavery to sin and death into which we had sold ourselves (Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9; cp. Exod 6:6; 15:13; Ps 130:8; Isa 44:22; 59:20; 63:9; Jer 31:11). In the spirit of the Old Testament family redeemer (such as Boaz) and following the example of our great Redeemer, we, too, are commanded to act with love and compassion toward others (Lev 19:11-18; Matt 5:43-48; 19:19; 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; Jas 2:8-9).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Lev 25:23-55; Num 35:9-34; Ruth 2:20; 3:9, 12; 4:1-10; Isa 59:20; Jer 32:6-15; Matt 20:28; Rom 3:24-25; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Rev 5:9<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","summary_en":"The Family Redeemer The idea of a family redeemer, established in the law of Moses, finds a vivid example in the story of Ruth. In that book, the expression “family redeemer” has a specific, technical meaning. Elsewhere, the underlying Hebrew term go’el is translated “nearest relative” (Num 27:11; 35:19, 24). According to the law, family redeemers had three main responsibilities in Israel: 1. Leviticus 25:23-34 stipulates that if an Israelite became so poor that he had to sell his land, a fam...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":147840,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"The Son of Man","title_en":"The Son of Man","content_ro":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>The Son of Man<\/h3>\n<p>“Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ben ’adam,<\/span> an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels:<\/p>\n<p>(1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figure “like a son of man” (that is, having human form) comes with the clouds of heaven and is given great glory and power. Jesus understood himself as the one who would return to earth in the clouds of heaven (see Mark 8:38; 13:26; 14:62). Sometimes Jesus used “Son of Man” in this sense, to refer to his role as judge, deliverer, savior, and vindicator (Matt 10:23; 13:41; 16:27; 19:28; 24:27, 30, 37, 44; 25:31; 26:64).<\/p>\n<p>(2) Often Jesus used “Son of Man” to describe himself as a suffering redeemer (12:40; 17:9, 12, 22; 20:18, 28; 26:2, 24, 45). This sense is rooted in Isa 52:13–53:12.<\/p>\n<p>(3) At times, Jesus apparently used “Son of Man” to refer to himself as the representative of humans (Matt 8:20; 11:19; 12:8, 32; 13:37). The book of Ezekiel uses “son of man” in a similar sense (e.g., Ezek 2:1-8).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus did not use “Son of Man” to distinguish his humanity from his deity (“Son of God”). By using this title, Jesus could define himself as Messiah on his own terms. He used “Son of Man” to describe his total identity and as a veiled suggestion that those who watched and heard him should pay attention to who he is.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Ezek 2:1-8; 3:1, 4, 10, 17, 25; 4:1; Dan 7:13-14; 8:17; Matt 8:18-22; 9:6; 10:23; 11:19; 12:8, 32, 40; 13:37, 41; 16:13, 27-28; 17:9, 12, 22; 19:28; 20:18, 28; 24:27, 30, 37-39, 44; 25:31; 26:2, 24, 45, 64; Mark 2:10; John 1:51; 3:13-14; 5:27; 6:27, 53, 62; 8:28; 9:35; 12:23, 34; 13:31; Acts 7:56; Heb 2:6; Rev 1:13; 14:14<\/p>","summary_ro":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","summary_en":"The Son of Man “Son of Man” was Jesus’ favorite way to refer to himself. The phrase is just as odd in Greek as in English: It translates the Hebrew phrase ben ’adam, an idiom that means “human being” or “person” (see, e.g., Ezek 2:1-8). One reason Jesus preferred this name was because it was not an inflammatory title such as “Christ” or “Messiah.” The expression is used in three ways in the Gospels: (1) The background to Jesus’ use of the title is Dan 7:13-14, where an exalted messianic figur...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"29":[{"id":19141,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jericho","title_en":"Jericho","content_ro":"<h3>JERICHO<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was located on the west side of the Jordan River about five miles (8 kilometers) from the southernmost fords and about ten miles (16 kilometers) northwest of the Dead Sea. Being in the broad part of the plain of the Jordan, it lies nearly 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level and about 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) below Jerusalem, which was a mere 17 miles (27 kilometers) away. This simple topographical fact explains the incidental words in Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan, “down from Jerusalem to Jericho” (Lk 10:30).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>Prebiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>Jericho was a large and thriving city for centuries, even millennia, before the Bible first mentions it in connection with the exodus from Egypt. In fact, Jericho is one of the oldest cities in the world, with remains dating to and before the Neolithic Age 10,000 years ago.<\/p>\n<p>For three reasons primitive people would have chosen this site, first as a settlement and eventually as a key city: (1) It has a copious spring, now called Elisha’s Fountain (cf. 2 Kgs 2:18-22). (2) It has a warm climate in the winter, although “hot” describes it in the summer. (3) It is strategically located at a Jordan ford and at the base of several routes leading westward to the foothills.<\/p>\n<p>The comings and goings of various populations can be reconstructed only sketchily from noninscriptional archaeological data. The civilizations grew more complex over the years, going from a simple food-gathering economy at first to the relatively complex urban society, complete with king, soldiers, and guest houses, that Joshua encountered. The first certain identification of its inhabitants occurs in Numbers 13:29: “The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\n<p>The Jericho of the OT is best known as the first city taken by the invading Israelites through the miracle of the falling walls. Having spent some time on the east bank of the Jordan in the plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63), the Israelites targeted it as the first military objective in the Conquest. Joshua sent spies to reconnoiter the land and the city. Rahab the harlot took them in and later engineered their escape. For her cooperation, she and her family were spared when Israel destroyed the city (Jos 2, 6). The fall of the city itself occurred after the Israelites had marched around it in silence, except for the continual blowing of trumpets, once a day for six days and then seven times on the seventh day. Then, as the priests blew the trumpets, the people shouted and the walls collapsed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua laid a curse on anyone who might rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26). The curse was fulfilled about 500 years later when Hiel rebuilt the city at the cost of two of his sons (1 Kgs 16:34).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was in the territory of Benjamin but right on the border with the territory of Ephraim to the north (Jos 16:1, 7; 18:12, 21) and appears in scattered incidents throughout the rest of the OT. In 2 Samuel 10:5 (see also 1 Chr 19:5) David had his humiliated ambassadors wait there until their beards grew back. It served as a kind of headquarters for Elisha and apparently was where a “company of the prophets” lived (2 Kgs 2:5; cf. 1 Sm 10:5). During the time of Ahaz, a return of prisoners took place there (2 Chr 28:15). When Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the reigning king, Zedekiah, fled to near Jericho but was caught by the Babylonians, who later put out his eyes at Riblah in Syria (2 Kgs 25:5; Jer 39:5; 52:8). The last OT references to Jericho are in the census lists of Ezra (Ezr 2:34) and Nehemiah (Neh 7:36). Men from Jericho also helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall (3:2).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>First, it must be understood that the Jericho of NT times was built by Herod more than a mile to the south of the OT site, at the mouth of the Wadi Qilt. It is possible to sort out the healing of the blind men episodes in the synoptic Gospels by understanding that Jesus was passing from the site of ancient Jericho (Mt 20:29; Mk 10:46) and approaching Herodian Jericho (Lk 18:35). The modern city of Jericho includes both these sites. As Jesus passed through Jericho (19:1) he met and ate with Zacchaeus, the wealthy chief tax collector of the new Roman Jericho. The city also figures in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37).<\/p>\n<h5>Postbiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>While ancient Jericho was of small consequence after its destruction under Joshua, the Jericho of Herod was a city of beauty and importance. But even this city fell into decay with the decline of Roman influence in the Middle East. Most of what we know of the city until modern times comes from the writings of pilgrims to the Holy Land. They usually report seeing certain things of biblical significance, such as the tree that Zacchaeus climbed, but they also report that Jericho was a squalid, wretched Muslim village. And such it has been until relatively recent times, when it grew in size and importance as a major West Bank city.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JERICHO<\/h3>\n<p>Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was located on the west side of the Jordan River about five miles (8 kilometers) from the southernmost fords and about ten miles (16 kilometers) northwest of the Dead Sea. Being in the broad part of the plain of the Jordan, it lies nearly 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level and about 3,500 feet (1,067 meters) below Jerusalem, which was a mere 17 miles (27 kilometers) away. This simple topographical fact explains the incidental words in Jesus’ parable of the good Samaritan, “down from Jerusalem to Jericho” (Lk 10:30).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"History\">History<\/p>\n<h5>Prebiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>Jericho was a large and thriving city for centuries, even millennia, before the Bible first mentions it in connection with the exodus from Egypt. In fact, Jericho is one of the oldest cities in the world, with remains dating to and before the Neolithic Age 10,000 years ago.<\/p>\n<p>For three reasons primitive people would have chosen this site, first as a settlement and eventually as a key city: (1) It has a copious spring, now called Elisha’s Fountain (cf. 2 Kgs 2:18-22). (2) It has a warm climate in the winter, although “hot” describes it in the summer. (3) It is strategically located at a Jordan ford and at the base of several routes leading westward to the foothills.<\/p>\n<p>The comings and goings of various populations can be reconstructed only sketchily from noninscriptional archaeological data. The civilizations grew more complex over the years, going from a simple food-gathering economy at first to the relatively complex urban society, complete with king, soldiers, and guest houses, that Joshua encountered. The first certain identification of its inhabitants occurs in Numbers 13:29: “The Hittites, the Jebusites, and the Amorites dwell in the hill country; and the Canaanites dwell by the sea, and along the Jordan” (<span>rsv<\/span>).<\/p>\n\n<h5>In the Old Testament<\/h5>\n<p>The Jericho of the OT is best known as the first city taken by the invading Israelites through the miracle of the falling walls. Having spent some time on the east bank of the Jordan in the plains of Moab (Nm 22:1; 26:3, 63), the Israelites targeted it as the first military objective in the Conquest. Joshua sent spies to reconnoiter the land and the city. Rahab the harlot took them in and later engineered their escape. For her cooperation, she and her family were spared when Israel destroyed the city (Jos 2, 6). The fall of the city itself occurred after the Israelites had marched around it in silence, except for the continual blowing of trumpets, once a day for six days and then seven times on the seventh day. Then, as the priests blew the trumpets, the people shouted and the walls collapsed.<\/p>\n<p>Joshua laid a curse on anyone who might rebuild Jericho (Jos 6:26). The curse was fulfilled about 500 years later when Hiel rebuilt the city at the cost of two of his sons (1 Kgs 16:34).<\/p>\n<p>Jericho was in the territory of Benjamin but right on the border with the territory of Ephraim to the north (Jos 16:1, 7; 18:12, 21) and appears in scattered incidents throughout the rest of the OT. In 2 Samuel 10:5 (see also 1 Chr 19:5) David had his humiliated ambassadors wait there until their beards grew back. It served as a kind of headquarters for Elisha and apparently was where a “company of the prophets” lived (2 Kgs 2:5; cf. 1 Sm 10:5). During the time of Ahaz, a return of prisoners took place there (2 Chr 28:15). When Jerusalem fell in 586 <span>BC<\/span>, the reigning king, Zedekiah, fled to near Jericho but was caught by the Babylonians, who later put out his eyes at Riblah in Syria (2 Kgs 25:5; Jer 39:5; 52:8). The last OT references to Jericho are in the census lists of Ezra (Ezr 2:34) and Nehemiah (Neh 7:36). Men from Jericho also helped rebuild the Jerusalem wall (3:2).<\/p>\n<h5>In the New Testament<\/h5>\n<p>First, it must be understood that the Jericho of NT times was built by Herod more than a mile to the south of the OT site, at the mouth of the Wadi Qilt. It is possible to sort out the healing of the blind men episodes in the synoptic Gospels by understanding that Jesus was passing from the site of ancient Jericho (Mt 20:29; Mk 10:46) and approaching Herodian Jericho (Lk 18:35). The modern city of Jericho includes both these sites. As Jesus passed through Jericho (19:1) he met and ate with Zacchaeus, the wealthy chief tax collector of the new Roman Jericho. The city also figures in the parable of the Good Samaritan (10:30-37).<\/p>\n<h5>Postbiblical Record<\/h5>\n<p>While ancient Jericho was of small consequence after its destruction under Joshua, the Jericho of Herod was a city of beauty and importance. But even this city fell into decay with the decline of Roman influence in the Middle East. Most of what we know of the city until modern times comes from the writings of pilgrims to the Holy Land. They usually report seeing certain things of biblical significance, such as the tree that Zacchaeus climbed, but they also report that Jericho was a squalid, wretched Muslim village. And such it has been until relatively recent times, when it grew in size and importance as a major West Bank city.<\/p>","summary_ro":"JERICHO Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15). Jericho was located on ...","summary_en":"JERICHO Ancient city on the west side of the Jordan River. The name Jericho may be connected to the ancient name of the Canaanite moon god. The Hebrew words for moon, month, new moon, and Jericho are very similar. Others associate it with the word for spirit or smell, assuming that the pleasant fragrances of the fruits and spices that grew in this oasis occasioned the name of the place. The OT occasionally calls it “the city of palm trees” (e.g., Dt 34:3; 2 Chr 28:15). Jericho was located on ...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":20520,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Jordan River","title_en":"Jordan River","content_ro":"<h3>JORDAN RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the descender.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sources\">Sources<\/p>\n<p>Originating at the northern end of the Huleh Basin, the river comprises four separate streams: Nahr Bereighith, Nahr Hasbani, Nahr el-Liddani, and Nahr Baniyas. In the northwest corner of the Huleh Valley the Bereighith emerges within the area of Merj Ayoun, flowing from a spring located on a modest knoll west of Mt Hermon. Slightly to the east is the Hasbani, a stream that descends from a spring 1,700 feet (518.2 meters) above sea level and follows a course of about 24 miles (38.6 kilometers). These two smaller streams merge less than a mile above their confluence with the el-Liddani and the Baniyas. The el-Liddani, lying between the Nahr Hasbani and the Nahr Baniyas, is located near Tel el-Qadi (the biblical city of Dan). The most powerful stream of the four; it is fed by ‘Ain Leddan, a spring that is nestled among thick underbrush and is fed by the melting snows off Mt Hermon. Flowing quickly and briefly, the el-Liddani rushes to meet the Nahr Baniyas, the last of the four streams. In the northeast corner of the Huleh Valley, at the NT site of Caesarea Philippi, the Baniyas originates from a cave approximately 1,100 feet (335 meters) above sea level and follows a steep descent to its confluence with the others. These four streams, making up the Jordan River, then flow together along a southerly course of 10 miles (16 kilometers) before entering Huleh Lake.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CourseandCharacteroftheRiver\">Course and Character of the River<\/p>\n<p>The course of the Jordan follows a north-south route through the Great Rift, descending gradually from the Huleh Lake (7 feet, or 2 meters, above sea level) to the Dead Sea (1,274 feet, or 388 meters, below sea level). From the Huleh Lake the river follows a 20-mile (32.2-kilometer) course, passing through the basaltic lip that forms the southern dam of the Huleh Basin (Rosh Pinnah Sill) and descends quickly to the Sea of Galilee (685 feet, or 209 meters, below sea level). To the south lies the Dead Sea at a distance of approximately 65 miles (105 kilometers). The river that connects these two seas, however, travels a circuitous route of 200 miles (322 kilometers), following a snakelike riverbed cut through the Ghor, the canyon floor.<\/p>\n<p>The Jordan has many tributaries, not all of which are perennial. If there is no consistent water source, such as a spring at the head of the riverbed, then these V-shaped watercourses remain dry until a seasonal deluge. When the rain comes, these dry, narrow courses are filled with fast-paced streams that flow off the sides of the canyon into the Jordan River. North of the Sea of Galilee four major systems feed the fluvial system in the Huleh Basin: Nahr Dishon and Nahr Hazor on the west, and Nahr Shuah and Nahr Gilbon on the east. Between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are the following major tributary systems: on the east—Yarmuq, ‘Arab, Tayibeh, Ziqlab, Jurm, Yabis, Kufrinjia, Rajib, Zarqa, Nimrin, Abu Gharuba; on the west—Fejjas, Bireh, Jalub, Malih, Far’ah, Aujah, el-Qelt.<\/p>\n<p>The character of the Ghor varies from north to south as the canyon floor drops farther below sea level. Just south of the Sea of Galilee arable fields may be cultivated without irrigation, which permits occupation and settlement. South of this and farther below sea level, beyond the narrowest constriction of the canyon at Ghor el-Wahadina, the terrain and climate change. Since the floor now consistently approaches 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level, the climatic conditions approximate that of the desert. In this dry and desolate region, the river and its immediate environs now assume a more prominent role, becoming a lifeline to the flora and the fauna that hug its banks. Its course and character are more easily discerned as it has become a veritable stream in the desert. The dense foliage on the banks of the Jordan is still today a wildlife haunt as it was in antiquity, the low-lying shrubs and the tamarisk alike providing thick ground cover. This lower section of the canyon, called the Zor, is 150 feet (45.7 meters) below the Ghor and separated by the <em>qattara<\/em> (a sedimentary deposit of grayish-white marls and clays that form precipitous and barren slopes) from the canyon floor above. Generally inaccessible and extremely dangerous, the Zor and <em>qattara<\/em> form a natural barrier between Cis-Jordan (west) and Transjordan (east). Thus, trade, settlement, and travel were necessarily affected by the various topographical features that characterize this area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalEvents\">Biblical Events<\/p>\n<p>The OT Israelites passed across the Jordan upon entry into the Promised Land (Jos 3:14-17). The fords of the Jordan were the sites of conflict in the war of Jephthah and the Gileadites against the Ephraimites (Jgs 12:1-6). The prophet Elijah sought refuge from Ahab king of Israel by the brook of Kerith east of the Jordan (1 Kgs 17:1-5). Elijah was translated up to heaven in a whirlwind after having crossed the Jordan with Elisha on dry ground (2 Kgs 2:6-12). Naaman, the Syrian general, bathed in the Jordan at the command of Elisha and his leprosy was healed (5:8-14). Elisha made the ax head float here (2 Kgs 6:1-7). In the NT, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan (Mt 3:13-17). Peter confessed that Jesus was the “Christ, the Son of the living God” at Caesarea Philippi—located on one of the sources of the Jordan, Nahr Baniyas (16:13-20). Jesus healed two blind men at Jericho, which is near the Jordan (20:29-34) and visited with Zacchaeus in that same city (Lk 19:1-10).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>JORDAN RIVER<\/h3>\n<p>River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the descender.”<\/p>\n\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Sources\">Sources<\/p>\n<p>Originating at the northern end of the Huleh Basin, the river comprises four separate streams: Nahr Bereighith, Nahr Hasbani, Nahr el-Liddani, and Nahr Baniyas. In the northwest corner of the Huleh Valley the Bereighith emerges within the area of Merj Ayoun, flowing from a spring located on a modest knoll west of Mt Hermon. Slightly to the east is the Hasbani, a stream that descends from a spring 1,700 feet (518.2 meters) above sea level and follows a course of about 24 miles (38.6 kilometers). These two smaller streams merge less than a mile above their confluence with the el-Liddani and the Baniyas. The el-Liddani, lying between the Nahr Hasbani and the Nahr Baniyas, is located near Tel el-Qadi (the biblical city of Dan). The most powerful stream of the four; it is fed by ‘Ain Leddan, a spring that is nestled among thick underbrush and is fed by the melting snows off Mt Hermon. Flowing quickly and briefly, the el-Liddani rushes to meet the Nahr Baniyas, the last of the four streams. In the northeast corner of the Huleh Valley, at the NT site of Caesarea Philippi, the Baniyas originates from a cave approximately 1,100 feet (335 meters) above sea level and follows a steep descent to its confluence with the others. These four streams, making up the Jordan River, then flow together along a southerly course of 10 miles (16 kilometers) before entering Huleh Lake.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"CourseandCharacteroftheRiver\">Course and Character of the River<\/p>\n<p>The course of the Jordan follows a north-south route through the Great Rift, descending gradually from the Huleh Lake (7 feet, or 2 meters, above sea level) to the Dead Sea (1,274 feet, or 388 meters, below sea level). From the Huleh Lake the river follows a 20-mile (32.2-kilometer) course, passing through the basaltic lip that forms the southern dam of the Huleh Basin (Rosh Pinnah Sill) and descends quickly to the Sea of Galilee (685 feet, or 209 meters, below sea level). To the south lies the Dead Sea at a distance of approximately 65 miles (105 kilometers). The river that connects these two seas, however, travels a circuitous route of 200 miles (322 kilometers), following a snakelike riverbed cut through the Ghor, the canyon floor.<\/p>\n<p>The Jordan has many tributaries, not all of which are perennial. If there is no consistent water source, such as a spring at the head of the riverbed, then these V-shaped watercourses remain dry until a seasonal deluge. When the rain comes, these dry, narrow courses are filled with fast-paced streams that flow off the sides of the canyon into the Jordan River. North of the Sea of Galilee four major systems feed the fluvial system in the Huleh Basin: Nahr Dishon and Nahr Hazor on the west, and Nahr Shuah and Nahr Gilbon on the east. Between the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are the following major tributary systems: on the east—Yarmuq, ‘Arab, Tayibeh, Ziqlab, Jurm, Yabis, Kufrinjia, Rajib, Zarqa, Nimrin, Abu Gharuba; on the west—Fejjas, Bireh, Jalub, Malih, Far’ah, Aujah, el-Qelt.<\/p>\n<p>The character of the Ghor varies from north to south as the canyon floor drops farther below sea level. Just south of the Sea of Galilee arable fields may be cultivated without irrigation, which permits occupation and settlement. South of this and farther below sea level, beyond the narrowest constriction of the canyon at Ghor el-Wahadina, the terrain and climate change. Since the floor now consistently approaches 1,000 feet (305 meters) below sea level, the climatic conditions approximate that of the desert. In this dry and desolate region, the river and its immediate environs now assume a more prominent role, becoming a lifeline to the flora and the fauna that hug its banks. Its course and character are more easily discerned as it has become a veritable stream in the desert. The dense foliage on the banks of the Jordan is still today a wildlife haunt as it was in antiquity, the low-lying shrubs and the tamarisk alike providing thick ground cover. This lower section of the canyon, called the Zor, is 150 feet (45.7 meters) below the Ghor and separated by the <em>qattara<\/em> (a sedimentary deposit of grayish-white marls and clays that form precipitous and barren slopes) from the canyon floor above. Generally inaccessible and extremely dangerous, the Zor and <em>qattara<\/em> form a natural barrier between Cis-Jordan (west) and Transjordan (east). Thus, trade, settlement, and travel were necessarily affected by the various topographical features that characterize this area.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"BiblicalEvents\">Biblical Events<\/p>\n<p>The OT Israelites passed across the Jordan upon entry into the Promised Land (Jos 3:14-17). The fords of the Jordan were the sites of conflict in the war of Jephthah and the Gileadites against the Ephraimites (Jgs 12:1-6). The prophet Elijah sought refuge from Ahab king of Israel by the brook of Kerith east of the Jordan (1 Kgs 17:1-5). Elijah was translated up to heaven in a whirlwind after having crossed the Jordan with Elisha on dry ground (2 Kgs 2:6-12). Naaman, the Syrian general, bathed in the Jordan at the command of Elisha and his leprosy was healed (5:8-14). Elisha made the ax head float here (2 Kgs 6:1-7). In the NT, Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist in the Jordan (Mt 3:13-17). Peter confessed that Jesus was the “Christ, the Son of the living God” at Caesarea Philippi—located on one of the sources of the Jordan, Nahr Baniyas (16:13-20). Jesus healed two blind men at Jericho, which is near the Jordan (20:29-34) and visited with Zacchaeus in that same city (Lk 19:1-10).<\/p>","summary_ro":"JORDAN RIVER River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the d...","summary_en":"JORDAN RIVER River lying in the bottom of a great canyon called the Jordan Rift, an elongated depression stretching from lower southwest Asia Minor (Syria) to the Gulf of Aqaba. The rift was once filled by the Lisan Lake, but significant geologic activity caused it to recede, and the result was the formation of three separate aqueous bodies: the Huleh Lake, the Sea of Galilee, and the Dead Sea. To this day each of these are fed by the Jordan River, the stream whose name in Hebrew means “the d...","source":"Articles\/J.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":54893,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","summary_en":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":82519,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","summary_en":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":110145,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","summary_en":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":137771,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Matei 20:29","title_en":"Study Note: Matei 20:29","content_ro":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>20:29-34<\/strong> The blind men’s expression of faith in the <em>Son of David<\/em> was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","summary_en":"20:29-34 The blind men’s expression of faith in the Son of David was an acknowledgment of Jesus as the Messiah (see 21:9; 22:42; 2 Sam 7:12-16).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65017,"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":92643,"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":120269,"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":147895,"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}],"30":[{"id":5229,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Blindness","title_en":"Blindness","content_ro":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>BLINDNESS<\/h3>\n<p>Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p>Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth process germs from the mother passed to the eyes of the infant, where they found an ideal medium for growth. Within three days inflammation, pus and swelling would be evident. In such cases, primitive treatment could not prevent some permanent or even total damage to the eye. Modern medical practice treats all newborn babies with antiseptic eyedrops; but such treatment is not always available to the poor, or is rejected by them in parts of the Middle East today. Babies and young children have also been threatened by infectious ophthalmia. Carried by flies, that disease causes heavy crusting, droopy eyelids, loss of eyelashes, and eventually clouding of the cornea, often leading to total blindness. In parts of the world one may still see a mother (because of folk superstition) permitting flies to swarm continuously on her baby’s face even as she holds the infant in her lap. Blindness among adults might be due to side effects from illnesses such as malaria, long exposure to sandstorms and sun glare in the desert, accidents, punishment (as with Samson, Jgs 16:21), or old age (Gn 27:1; 1 Sm 4:15; 1 Kgs 14:4).<\/p>\n<p>The OT demanded special consideration for the blind (Lv 19:14) and imposed punishment for misleading a blind person (Dt 27:18). A blind man, considered defective, was not permitted to serve as a priest (Lv 21:18).<\/p>\n<p>Jesus’ healing ministry brought sight to the blind in fulfillment of prophecy (Lk 4:18). His ability to restore vision was one of the proofs given to John the Baptist that Jesus was the Messiah (Mt 11:5). Jesus healed two blind men in Galilee (9:27-30), one blind man in Bethsaida (Mk 8:22-26), a man blind from birth in Jerusalem (Jn 9), and a blind beggar named Bartimaeus and his friend at Jericho (Mk 10:46-52; cf. Mt 20:30-34; Lk 18:35-43). At times Jesus commanded immediate restoration (Mk 10:52). On other occasions he used “means” such as clay and water (Jn 9:6-11) or his own saliva (Mk 8:23). The apostle Paul was blinded at his conversion and received a miraculous cure in the presence of Ananias (Acts 9:1-9, 18). Paul later afflicted a sorcerer, Elymas, with temporary blindness for opposing his ministry on the island of Cyprus (13:11).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Medicine and Medical Practice; Disease.<\/p>","summary_ro":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","summary_en":"BLINDNESS Condition of lacking the ability to see. Physical blindness was common in the ancient Near East and is still prevalent among the poor and tribal peoples lacking the benefits of modern medicine. Medical causes of blindness are not specified in the Bible, but poor personal hygiene and unsanitary living conditions were undoubtedly contributing factors. Newborn babies were especially susceptible. Much blindness from birth (Jn 9:1-3) was probably gonorrhea of the eyes. In the birth proce...","source":"Articles\/B.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":61363,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":88989,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":116615,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144241,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"God’s Covenant with David","title_en":"God’s Covenant with David","content_ro":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>God’s Covenant with David<\/h3>\n<p>God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when he promised a royal dynasty to David (2 Sam 7:4-17). In addition, God promised through Jeremiah to make a “new covenant” in the future (Jer 31:31-34).<\/p>\n<p>God’s promise to David is not explicitly identified as a covenant in 2 Samuel 7. However, other passages do identify the event as a covenant (see 23:5; 2 Chr 7:18; 21:7; Pss 89:3-4, 28-29; 132:11-12; Isa 55:3; Jer 33:20-21). God’s promise to David that his “favor will not be taken from him” (2 Sam 7:15) speaks of a covenant relationship. Like God’s promise to Abraham, his covenant with David is unconditional: It does not depend on human obedience or faithfulness but only on God’s unchanging love.<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of this covenant is God’s promise to raise up David’s successors forever and to be a father to them (cp. 1 Kgs 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kgs 8:19). God’s blessing on Solomon’s reign is a partial fulfillment of this promise (cp. 2 Sam 7:10-11 with 1 Kgs 8:56; see also 1 Kgs 8:20, 24). God’s patience with the kings of Judah even when they turned away from him was the result of his covenant promise to David (see 1 Kgs 11:12-13; 15:3-5).<\/p>\n<p>The complete and final fulfillment of God’s covenant with David is found in the Messiah, Jesus Christ, the “son of David” (e.g., see Matt 9:27; 20:30-31; 21:9, 15). Isaiah foretold of one who would rule “from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity” (Isa 9:7) and called him the “shoot” growing “out of the stump of David’s family” (Isa 11:1). Both of these references point to the coming Messiah. Four passages in the New Testament teach that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of the promises made to David by referring directly to 2 Sam 7:1-29 (Luke 1:32-33; Acts 2:29-31; 13:22-23; Heb 1:5). The New Testament opens (Matt 1:1) and closes (Rev 22:16) with reference to Jesus as the son of David, the successor to his throne.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>2 Sam 7:5-16; 1 Kgs 8:20-24; 11:9-13; 15:1-5; 2 Kgs 8:18-19; 2 Chr 7:17-22; Pss 89:3-4, 18-51; 132:10-12; Isa 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Jer 33:20-26; Matt 1:1; 20:30-31; 21:1-9; Luke 1:30-33, 67-79; Acts 2:22-36; Rev 22:16<\/p>","summary_ro":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","summary_en":"God’s Covenant with David God made covenants with his people five times in the Old Testament: (1) when he promised Noah that humanity would never again be destroyed by a flood (Gen 6:18; 9:1-17); (2) when he promised Abraham that he would inherit the land of Canaan and establish a great nation (Gen 15:1-21; 17:1-27); (3) when he formed a unique relationship with Israel at Mount Sinai through Moses (Exod 19–23); (4) when he promised a priestly dynasty to Phinehas (Num 25:10-13); and (5) when h...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"34":[{"id":25213,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Mercy","title_en":"Mercy","content_ro":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>MERCY<\/h3>\n<p>A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4).<\/p>\n<p>The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meaning involved, such as “kindness,” “lovingkindness,” “goodness,” “grace,” “favor,” “pity,” “compassion,” and “steadfast love.” Prominent in the concept of mercy is the compassionate disposition to forgive offenders or adversaries and to help or spare them in their sorry plight.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"TheologicalSignificance\">Theological Significance<\/p>\n<p>At the heart of the concept of mercy is the love of God, which is freely manifested in his gracious saving acts on behalf of those to whom he has pledged himself in covenant relationship. In the OT it was his chosen people Israel whom he elected to be his own and to whom he showed mercy (Ex 33:19; Is 54:10; 63:9). God persistently puts up with his disobedient and wayward people and continuously seeks them out to draw them back to himself. The psalmist describes God as a father who pities his children who revere and trust him (Ps 103:13). Hosea pictures God as a loving father who looks down from heaven with a yearning heart of compassion upon his rebellious and wayward people (Hos 11; cf. Jer 31:20). He also regards Israel as an unfaithful and adulterous wife whom God loves as a faithful husband in spite of her apostate and sinful condition (Hos 1–3; cf. Is 54:4-8). Isaiah depicts God as a mother who has compassion on the son of her womb (Is 49:15). These pictures reveal God’s mercy in rich and different ways. Other dimensions include forgiveness and restoration to favor (2 Kgs 13:23; Is 54:8; Jl 2:18-32; Mi 7:18-20), and deliverance from distress and perils (Neh 9:19-21; Pss 40:11-17; 69:16-36; 79:8-9; Is 49:10).<\/p>\n<p>Because of what Israel as a covenant nation had learned about the steadfast love and faithfulness of God, devout Jews instinctively lifted their voices in petition for divine mercy and forgiveness in times of need, eloquently expressed in the penitential psalms (Pss 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), as well as other OT passages (Ex 34:6; Neh 9:17; Pss 57; 79; 86; 123; Is 33:1-6; Dn 9:3-19; Jl 2:13). It is the remembrance of God’s mercy that gives the repentant person the hope and assurance of divine favor and of reconciliation with the offended Lord.<\/p>\n<p>In the NT a very descriptive Greek word is used for Jesus’ mercy toward the needy (Mt 9:36; 14:14; 20:34). It expresses his pity and compassion by means of an intense verb literally translated “to be moved in one’s bowels.” The Hebrews regarded the bowels as the center of the affections, especially that of the most tender kindness. Jesus was described as being deeply moved in his inner feeling of benevolence toward the needy and spontaneously acting to relieve their suffering—to heal (Mt 20:34; Mk 1:41), to raise the dead (Lk 7:13), and to feed the hungry (Mt 15:32).<\/p>\n<p>The OT concept of God’s mercy expressed in his faithfulness to the covenant people is found also in the NT (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78; Eph 2:4; 1 Tm 1:2; 1 Pt 1:3; 2:10). The most characteristic use of mercy in the NT is that of God’s provision of salvation for mankind in Jesus Christ (Rom 11:30-32; Eph 2:4). God is “the Father of mercies” (2 Cor 1:3), which he bestows on those who believe in his Son. It is because he is “so rich in mercy” that he saved those who are spiritually dead and doomed by their sins (Eph 2:4-6). It is out of God’s mercy that one is forgiven and granted eternal life (1 Tm 1:13-16).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PeoplesResponsibilitytoShowMercytoOthers\">People’s Responsibility to Show Mercy to Others<\/p>\n<p>Because God has freely extended his mercy irrespective of worthiness or faithfulness, people are to respond by showing mercy to others, even though they do not deserve it or seek it. Indeed, people are commanded to be merciful, especially to the poor, the needy, widows, and orphans (Prv 14:31; 19:17; Mi 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Col 3:12). God regards mercy more than the ritual sacrifice (Mt 9:13). God’s mercy in Christ actually puts people under obligation to act toward others as God himself has acted toward them. The Lord made mercy a foundation for his teaching (Mt 5:7; 9:13; 12:7; 23:23; Lk 6:36; 10:37; Jas 3:17). His coming was anticipated and announced in the context of the mercy that would characterize his mission (Lk 1:50, 54, 72, 78).<\/p>\n<p>Members of the Christian church are to show compassion and practical concern for each other. They are to give aid and relief, love and comfort to one another, as Christ freely gave to them in their need. The apostle James teaches the essential nature of such good works as being of the very essence of genuine faith (Jas 2:14-26). It was the mercy that the good Samaritan had toward the man who was beaten and robbed that was singled out by the Lord for special commendation (Lk 10:36-37). To be full of mercy is a distinguishing virtue of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven (Mt 5:7).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> God, Being and Attributes of; Grace; Love.<\/p>","summary_ro":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","summary_en":"MERCY A divine quality by which God faithfully keeps his promises and maintains his covenant relationship with his chosen people despite their unworthiness and unfaithfulness (Dt 30:1-6; Is 14:1; Ez 39:25-29; Rom 9:15-16, 23; 11:32; Eph 2:4). The biblical meaning of mercy is exceedingly rich and complex, as evidenced by the fact that several Hebrew and Greek words were used to express the concept. Consequently, there are many synonyms employed in translation to express the dimensions of meani...","source":"Articles\/M.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":65019,"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":92645,"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":120271,"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":147897,"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}]},"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"}}